Collapsars vrs. QM degeneracy pressure

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the interplay between quantum mechanics and gravitational forces in stellar evolution, particularly the role of quantum mechanical (QM) degeneracy pressure and the Pauli Exclusion Principle (PEP). It is established that while the PEP prevents electrons from losing heat and succumbing to gravity, extreme conditions can lead to relativistic effects that allow gravity to dominate. The transition from white dwarfs to neutron stars involves electron capture, forming neutrons, and the potential for neutron stars to collapse into black holes is explored, suggesting a state of quark-gluon plasma. For further understanding, the book "Rotation and Accretion Powered Pulsars" by Pranab Gosh is recommended.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics, specifically the Pauli Exclusion Principle
  • Knowledge of stellar evolution, particularly white dwarfs and neutron stars
  • Familiarity with relativistic physics and its implications on particle behavior
  • Basic concepts of quantum chromodynamics, including quark-gluon interactions
NEXT STEPS
  • Read "Rotation and Accretion Powered Pulsars" by Pranab Gosh, focusing on chapter 2
  • Explore the concept of relativistic electrons and their impact on stellar collapse
  • Investigate the formation and properties of quark-gluon plasma in astrophysical contexts
  • Study the mechanisms of neutronization and neutrino escape in dense stellar environments
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, astrophysicists, and students of theoretical physics interested in stellar dynamics, quantum mechanics, and the evolution of compact objects in the universe.

Helios
Messages
267
Reaction score
63
The QM degeneracy pressure puts up a fight but the immensity of the star wins out. Why is this? Is the Pauli Exclusion Principle really a principle? Why does it surrender in this case?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
From white dwarf to neutron star, the electrons are forced to combine with protons to form neutrons. Neutron stars collapsing to black holes is unknown - could be quark gluon soup.
 
Or if strings have anything to do with it, quark gluon soup with noodles.
 
You can read the book of Pranab Gosh, "Rotation and Accretion Powered Pulsars", ch. 2 about this. But this phenomena is something like this: there is a range for every interaction all over the universe. For instance, almost all of the celestial objects are dipole dominated magnets but we don't see that they're pushing each other away (this is not exactly the same case but just an example). So, the Pauli exclusion principle is really a principle but in that kind of circumstances, I mean under such a huge degeneracy pressure and in such a tiny volume, it can not work as usual. All of the particles are lined up in the Fermi surface. In the so-called "well potential" examples as we know that the principle is valid, the mean range is always taken about the atomic range, 10^{-15} meters. For further info, you should read the chapter that I've mentioned above.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Brandon Carlson
Helios said:
The QM degeneracy pressure puts up a fight but the immensity of the star wins out. Why is this? Is the Pauli Exclusion Principle really a principle? Why does it surrender in this case?
The Pauli exclusion principle never surrenders, all the principle says is that the electrons reach a ground state where they cannot lose any more heat. Losing heat is normally how a star gradually succumbs to gravity, but the PEP prevents that from proceeding to its ultimate conclusion. However, there is still a way that gravity can win out-- by releasing enough energy to make the electrons go relativistic before the whole system reaches its ground state. Relativistic electrons have a different relationship between momentum and kinetic energy, which makes them able to be in their ground state without uniquely specifying a radius-- any radius will do. This makes them susceptible to drastic contraction, especially if processes are going on (like neutronization) that remove kinetic energy via the escape of neutrinos. So we should not say the PEP surrenders, we should say that gravity finds a way to collapse the core without violating the PEP.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Helios

Similar threads

  • · Replies 109 ·
4
Replies
109
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 63 ·
3
Replies
63
Views
25K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
10K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K