A Neutron star collisions as a heavy element source

Click For Summary
The recent observation of neutron star (NS) mergers has sparked debate about their role as a source of heavy elements in the universe. A new paper suggests that these mergers could account for a significant portion of the heavy elements, aligning with terrestrial measurements. However, many argue that supernovae are the primary producers of heavy elements, as neutron star collisions are too infrequent to account for all observed abundances. Discussions also highlight the mechanisms of element distribution in the galaxy, with kilonovae being a likely candidate for dispersal. Overall, while neutron star mergers contribute to heavy element formation, supernovae are still considered the dominant source.
  • #31
  • Like
Likes JMz
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #32
This is why we keep coming back. I never seem quite able to manage leaving here dumber than I was upon arrival.
 
  • Like
Likes krater
  • #33
I think there's a lot of that going on. ;-)
 
  • #34
JMz said:
Yeah. But X-rays are another way to find NSs, which might give a handle on the ratio: imprecise, but even factor-of-2 accuracy would be plenty at this point.

BTW:

Presumably neutrons would not participate in this flow, as they are electrically neutral. At the NS surfaces, they will decay into protons & electrons, which can.
Neutrons don't have an electric charge, it's true, but they do have a magnetic moment on the same order of magnitude as the proton and so would be affected significantly by the neutron stars' powerful magnetic fields. In fact, it was the neutron's magnetic moment that gave the first hint that the neutron had some sort of internal structure.
But let me clarify another point - there's no reason to think that as the neutron stars get closer that their magnetic fields would force them to flip upside down. The magnetic force is very short range, and even though very powerful still overshadowed by gravitational attraction, although interaction of their magnetic fields might alter the neutron stars dynamics appreciably.
One more thing, from this thread it appears that you seem to think that there are pulsars and then there are neutron stars with no appreciable magnetic fields. All neutron stars have magnetic fields and are pulsars. The only reason we can't observe them all is that not all of them are aligned with our line of sight.
 
  • #35
alantheastronomer said:
Neutrons don't have an electric charge, it's true, but they do have a magnetic moment on the same order of magnitude as the proton and so would be affected significantly by the neutron stars' powerful magnetic fields. In fact, it was the neutron's magnetic moment that gave the first hint that the neutron had some sort of internal structure.
True. I took the previous post to be focused on the currents, only.
...One more thing, from this thread it appears that you seem to think that there are pulsars and then there are neutron stars with no appreciable magnetic fields. All neutron stars have magnetic fields and are pulsars. The only reason we can't observe them all is that not all of them are aligned with our line of sight.
[If you are still addressing my post at this point, rather than @Chronos's, to which I was replying:]
Agreed, though my comment was only about X-rays as an alternative mode of discovery: The pulsar behavior might be unobservable because of alignment or otherwise, whereas looking for X-rays would also be unsuccessful for some (perhaps most) NSs but would be subject to a different set of selection effects than pulsar behavior.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
38
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K