Does Density Affect Gravity in the Formation of Neutron Stars?

  • Thread starter Thread starter electerr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Density Gravity
AI Thread Summary
Neutron stars and black holes exhibit strong gravitational forces due to their high density, not merely their mass. When a massive star undergoes a supernova, it loses mass, but the remaining core's radius shrinks significantly, increasing its surface gravity. Surface gravity is influenced by both mass and the distance from the center of the object, leading to stronger gravitational effects as the radius decreases. The escape velocity from the core can exceed the speed of light, resulting in the formation of a black hole. The relationship between surface gravity and mass is described by the equation A_g = GM/r^2, where A_g is the acceleration due to gravity.
electerr
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am a bit confused with how a neutron star or black hole has such a high force of gravity.

As I understand the process of star death of a massive star (I'll use a neutron star for example),

1) the star fuses heavier and heavier elements
2) the core begins to contract
3) this eventually causes a supernova in which the outer envelopes are blown off (star looses mass)
4) the remaining contracted and dense core is supported from further collapse by neutron degenerate pressure
5) this is what is known as a neutron star

Yes, I know this is the simplified version but the thing I don't get is, if the original star looses mass in the supernova explosion (and in theory even if it didn't) why then does the remaining core (neutron star) have a higher gravitational force than the original star did? I thought that gravitational force only was dependant on mass not density. Two objects with the same mass curve spacetime equal amounts regardless of density or...? I don't understand that when a certain mass (in this case a star core) is shrunk into a object with higher density (a neutron star) but still has the same mass (or in this case even less mass)that it's gravitational field becomes stronger just because it is more dense.

Obviously, I have misunderstood something about gravity or star death and if someone could help explain it would be great!

Thanks a lot!
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
They don't have stronger gravitational fields. For examle, if the Sn were to suddenly collapse into a black hole, the Earth wouldn't notice any difference in gravitational effect.

What does happen is that the radius of the body shrinks to a point where the surface gravity can become very strong, since surface gravity also depends on distance from the center of the body.

Escape velocity also depends on distance from the center of the body. So when a black hole forms, what happens is that the body shrinks to the point that its physical radius is smaller than the distance from its center where the escape velocity is greater than the speed of light for that body's mass. Any light passing that point can't leave again, and any light originating inside these radius could not get out.
 
Ok great, that clears things up then.

One more thing, is there a equation that describes the relationship between an objects "surface gravity" and it's mass?

Thanks again for the help!
 
electerr said:
Ok great, that clears things up then.

One more thing, is there a equation that describes the relationship between an objects "surface gravity" and it's mass?

Thanks again for the help!

A_g = \frac{GM}{r^2}

where Ag is the acceleration due to gravity
G is the universal gravitational constant
M is the mass of the body
r is the radius of the body

For comparison, Ag = 9.8 m/s^2 for the surface of the Earth. Otherwise known as 1g.
 
Perfect!

That helped a lot!

Thanks!
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
Back
Top