Read article on Pulsars, not clear how a sphere sources pole-only emission?

AI Thread Summary
Pulsars emit radiation primarily from their magnetic poles due to strong magnetic fields that concentrate beams in these areas. The entire surface of a pulsar acts as a radio source, but the magnetic field restricts emissions to the poles, where the field is more curved, enhancing radiation output. The discussion raises questions about the beam's width and whether the radiation travels across the surface before reaching the poles. Observations suggest that the beams are narrow, influenced by the pulsar's rotation and magnetic configuration. Overall, the mechanisms of pulsar emissions highlight the complexities of astrophysical phenomena compared to biological systems.
ndvcxk
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
The pole still has extremely strong gravity, how can a sphere suddenly concentrate the radiation at the pole to be emitted there ?

As this is the only exit, should there not be a strong deformation ? How does the radiation make it to the pole, or, is the radiation we are getting only from the small pole area, the rest of the surface does not supply any ?

Thx, newbie!
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
The pulsar has very strong magnetic fields which concentrate the beams and only allow them out at the poles.

200px-Pulsar_schematic.svg.png

Form the wiki article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsar
 
Thx for responding. In the picture the beam is way too thin, should the emission not be
way, way broader, (yet, we assume rotation is so fast).

1) Is there any possibility of replicating a magnetic-field controlled radiation emission from a sphere to form a so finely-focused beam ? (The absence of the field must be tube shaped !)

2) Is the radio-source "creeping along" the rest of the surface before it hits the poles ?

3) Or, are we only seeing the emission of the poles, nothing else.

(No, I don't think there are little green men, they would choose a pattern..)

I find astronomy, (compared to the lifesciences) highly, highly deductive, it's a bit
like a fantasy field...
 
ndvcxk said:
Thx for responding. In the picture the beam is way too thin, should the emission not be
way, way broader, (yet, we assume rotation is so fast).
The beam width would depend on the details of the magnetic field - not sure how you would measure it directly. If you knew the distance to the pulsar and measured th epulse width you could get the angle - but only if you knew the beam was aimed directly at you and so you were getting the full width. You can see the beam from an X-ray pulsar in a nebula where it lights up the surrounding gas.

2) Is the radio-source "creeping along" the rest of the surface before it hits the poles ?
3) Or, are we only seeing the emission of the poles, nothing else.
The mechanism is different in different types of pulsar but basically the whole surface is a radio source. Stuff hitting the surface is turned into a plasma that is trapped by the field, the charged plasma moving in a curved field gives you radio emission. The magnetic field blocks the radio signal everywhere except at the poles. The field at the poles is also more curved which gives the most emission.


I find astronomy, (compared to the lifesciences) highly, highly deductive, it's a bit
like a fantasy field...
There are more weird objects to consider but they are also very simple in some sense. YOu have isolated objects on their own that you can study individually - much simpler than the interrelated mechanisms in biology.
 
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