A Do any coordinate systems include self magnification?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the gravitational self-magnification of neutron stars, which makes them appear larger to distant observers than they actually are. It highlights that from the center of a neutron star, one could theoretically observe a full 360 degrees of the surrounding space, while from the surface, visibility is limited to 180 degrees. Observers at the equator of a neutron star could see a unique arrangement of constellations, including stars that should be below the horizon. The effects of the neutron star's rotation and proximity to Earth would create unusual celestial phenomena, such as extended daylight and rapid star movements across the sky. This raises questions about the incorporation of such phenomena into existing coordinate systems.
DarkStar42
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Take a neutron star, its surface will be gravitationally self magnified so that it looks bigger to the distant observer, than it 'really' is, plus you can see some of the rear facing surface.

If you take the centre of the neutron star, then this process must go on there also, although unseen.

I was wondering if any coordinate system incorporated this process, say by building the shape of space from the inside of the neutron star, outwards, as the distant observer might 'see' it..?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
DarkStar42 said:
...
If you take the centre of the neutron star, then this process must go on there also, although unseen...
...

From the center of the neutron star the neutron star occupies 360 degrees same as center of Earth. From the surface of the neutron star the neutron star occupies 180 degrees same as surface of Earth. You could see stars that should be over the horizon.
 
stefan r said:
From the center of the neutron star the neutron star occupies 360 degrees same as center of Earth. From the surface of the neutron star the neutron star occupies 180 degrees same as surface of Earth. You could see stars that should be over the horizon.

a distant observer can see more than 50% of the neutron star's surface.

4335232013_3755299c6c_o.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 4335232013_3755299c6c_o.jpg
    4335232013_3755299c6c_o.jpg
    13 KB · Views: 775
DarkStar42 said:
a distant observer can see more than 50% of the neutron star's surface.

View attachment 228304

That picture is nice. An observer on that equator would see 180 degrees of neutron star and 180 degrees (180° by 360°) of space same as an observer on Earth.

The sky would include more than 180 degrees of the constellations. Suppose the neutron star was near Earth and spinning on Earth's axis. An observer at the surface equator would be able to see both the southern cross and Polaris. A time-lapse photo would show non-circular rings around Polaris. Orion and Taurus could be visible on one horizon while both Lyra and Bootes were still visible on the other. When a star set it would rise on the other horizon in much less than a day. Orion would be thin at rising, get fat while overhead and then tighten his belt before setting. It would still look like a 180 degree dome. If the Sun was in orbit then it would be daylight for much more than half the day even at the equator at equinox. You would get white nights at mid latitudes during the summers.
 
Is a homemade radio telescope realistic? There seems to be a confluence of multiple technologies that makes the situation better than when I was a wee lad: software-defined radio (SDR), the easy availability of satellite dishes, surveillance drives, and fast CPUs. Let's take a step back - it is trivial to see the sun in radio. An old analog TV, a set of "rabbit ears" antenna, and you're good to go. Point the antenna at the sun (i.e. the ears are perpendicular to it) and there is...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top