Comprehensive coverage

A new insight into magnets

Neutron stars are the remnants of very massive stars (10 to 50 times the mass of our Sun), which have collapsed under their own weight. Their diameter is around 20 kilometers but they are so compressed that a spoon made of the material of a neutron star would weigh about a hundred million tons. Some of them have a huge magnetic field and are called magnets

Magnetar. Figure: European Space Agency
Magnetar. Figure: European Space Agency

Neutron stars are the remnants of very massive stars (10 to 50 times the mass of our Sun), which have collapsed under their own weight. Their diameter is around 20 kilometers but they are so compressed that a spoon made of the material of a neutron star would weigh about a hundred million tons. Two other physical properties characterize a neutron star: their fast rotation rate and the huge magnetic field. A magnetar is a type of neutron star whose magnetic field is extremely strong, about a thousand times stronger than the magnetic field of a "normal" neutron star, which makes them the strongest magnets known in the universe. However, astronomers were not sure why the magnetars shine in the X-ray field. Data from the European Space Agency's Newton and Integral space telescopes were used to test, for the first time, the properties of magnetars in the X-ray field.

So far, about 15 magnetars have been discovered, five of which are known as soft gamma repeaters (SGR) - due to the fact that they randomly emit large but short bursts (less than 0.1 seconds) of gamma ray energy in the low energy (soft) range and -X keys. The rest, about ten other suspected magnetars are pulsars in the X-ray field that reveal some anomaly (AXP). SGR and AXP were initially thought to be different bodies, but today we know that they share many of the properties and that their activity is maintained by strong magnetic fields.

Magnetars differ from 'normal' neutron stars because their internal magnetic field is thought to be strong enough to shake the star's crust. Like a circuit fed by a giant battery, this shock produces currents in the form of electron clouds that flow around the star. These currents interact with the radiation coming from the surface of the star and create the X-rays.

Until now, the scientists could not test their predictions because it was impossible to produce such a strong magnetic field in laboratories on Earth. To understand the phenomenon, a team led by Dr. Nada Rhea from the University of Amsterdam, began using Newton's and integral data to search for these electron clouds in all known magnetars, for the first time.

Rhea's team discovered evidence that large electron streams do exist, and even managed to measure the electron density, which is thousands of times higher than in "normal" pulsars. The team members also measured the typical speed of the electron stream. The scientists also managed to make a connection between the observed phenomenon and a specific physical process, an important clue in the puzzle of understanding these celestial objects.

The team is now working on developing and testing more detailed computer models to better understand the material's behavior under the influence of such strong magnetic fields.

Comments

  1. A. Ben Ner:
    Antimatter has a completely normal mass and not one that creates a repulsive force.
    Here and there the claim is raised (mainly in the context of wormholes) that something called "exotic matter" with a negative mass would allow certain things, but there is no evidence of the existence of such an exotic matter.

  2. Lahan T., Michael R. (formerly Michael) and Sabdarmish Yehuda.
    Chen T's question deserves, in my opinion, careful consideration, although in my opinion, it should be worded slightly differently, as follows:
    Is there any physical state of matter that is expected to cause a gravitational force of repulsion?
    The immediate answer that comes to mind is: antimatter.
    The accepted explanation is that, the amount of matter in the universe is greater than the amount of antimatter, however, the new findings (relatively) about the inflationary universe may raise opposite thoughts regarding the quantity relations in the universe between matter and antimatter. Maybe the excess antimatter in the universe, which creates an excess of antigravity, is the possible source of dark energy? Huh?

  3. Melody T

    I will repeat your question:-
    "If compression results in a very strong gravitational force, will incompressibility result in an anti-gravity force? In other words, if we bring the distance between the parts of the atom to a grandiose degree, and we create a mega-atom compact surface, will it resist the gravitational force?" End quote.
    And hence Michael's accepted answer:-
    "Why? Gravity is created by mass and not by compression." End quote
    And indeed this is the accepted opinion.
    In my opinion, things are not that simple. It is impossible to decide with absolute certainty how a highly compressed mass will behave. And what is meant?
    The well-known Newton's formula was measured and proved to be correct only for masses with normal compression, up to about twenty grams per cm in a third of the heavy metals such as gold and uranium.
    But here we are talking about millions of tons per cm in the third, can we be sure that even at a density of a million times the gravitation formula will behave without a component in the formula that expresses the density?, will we even then be sure that the formula will behave according to the square of the distance?
    Food for thought.
    My private personal opinion is that in very compressed stars, the gravitational force of a star tends to be more proportional to its cross-sectional area and not to its mass, and it is possible that at tiny distances there is also an effect of a repulsive force, so maybe there is something in your intuition.
    You can read more details about unacceptable gravitation on my blog. and ask there.
    Unfortunately, my father does not like the non-acceptable thinking physics and prefers that science only have conventional physics. Too bad.

    Good Day
    Sabdarmish Yehuda
    http://madaveteva.blogli.co.il/
    I will be happy to answer you on this topic on my blog

  4. Michael, almost every force has a counter force or a force that cancels it,
    There must be a force by which we will neutralize the force of gravity or oppose it

  5. Chen T:
    No way?
    Gravity is created by the mass and not by the compressions.
    In regions whose distance from the center of gravity is greater than the radius of the normal star, the gravitational force of a neutron star is the same as the gravitational force of a normal star.
    In areas closer to the center of gravity it is no longer possible to talk about the gravitational force of the normal star.
    Since gravity (according to Newton) is proportional to one part of the distance squared, the ability to get close to the center of gravity of the mass and still be affected by it increases the force of gravity in areas that can be approached, but even at large distances, one part of the squared radius remains positive and the force of attraction does not change direction.
    By the way, why didn't you ask Hugin too?

  6. If compression results in the strongest gravity, will incompressibility result in anti-gravity? That is, if we bring to a situation where the distance between the parts of the atom will be grandiosely large, and we create a mega-atom sealer from a surface, will it resist the force of gravity?

  7. Radius of an atom: about 100 picometers.
    Radius of a neutron: about 1 femtometre.
    The radius of the atom is 100 thousand times greater than the neutron. That's why the volume is four times bigger and that's how we get to these numbers.

  8. N. Zemach:
    That's the whole idea of ​​a neutron star.
    It's a star where the atoms have collapsed and even the electrons have fused with the protons to form neutrons.

  9. Discovery: What wiped out the dinosaurs about 65 million years ago was not an asteroid in diameter

    About 10 km but a teaspoon from the neutron star that my father writes about above.

    From now on say what killed the dinosaurs was a spoon...

    And something serious: my mind does not grasp such compression that one cmXNUMX of a substance would weigh tens of millions
    tone.
    Let's take a single atom. What is the ratio of emptiness in it compared to the material in it, protons, electrons, etc.
    One in a million? One in a trillion? After all, even if the ratio is one to a trillion times a trillion-
    And they will compress all the material until the void in the atoms is eliminated, we will not yet reach the degree of compression
    That one cubic meter will weigh tens of millions of tons.

Leave a Reply

Email will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismat to prevent spam messages. Click here to learn how your response data is processed.