View Full Version here: : ITN: Unusual Pulsar Discovered
15-10-2010, 08:05 AM
Gamma and X-Ray emission detected from a weaker non-magnetic pulsar SGR 0418:
Mysterious pulsar with hidden powers discovered (http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-10-mysterious-pulsar-hidden-powers.html)
The issue challenging the model is the size differential between surface and internal magnetic field strengths.
Would be good to get the paper. Does anyone have access to the "Science Express" publication ?
15-10-2010, 02:03 PM
Correction … (I found the paper) ..
The issue is the low surface dipolar magnetic field, B < 3 × 10∧13 Gauss (quite low - in the range of only a radio pulsar class).
In order for this object to emit bursts with such a low surface field, it is hypothesised that the magnetar activity is driven by the magnetic energy stored in the internal toroidal field. This component cannot be measured directly.
This large internal field could stress the crust and ultimately deforms/cracks the star surface layers, periodically allowing magnetic helicity to be transferred to the external field, thus causing the (repeated) short x-ray bursts, (period ∼9.1 s, slow pulsations with a variable pulse profile), and the overall magnetar-like activity.
15-10-2010, 02:11 PM
heheh more surprises aye, we seem to have a relaxation oscillator being interrupted by inbound current... kinda what we were saying was going to happen?
The 'power' is not hidden deep within, it's being delivered externally from the incoming current from the galactic environment, to the star system. As the plasma spheres receive this current, critical limit will be met causing the double layers (capacitors) to release outbursts. The system is at the complete mercy of the electrical environment.
Or yes hey, maybe it's not a surge to a strobe light, maybe it's some other untestable property of our hypothetical 'neutron stars'.
18-10-2010, 08:35 AM
We all know what you are going to say when something like this appears in the press :shrug:
But, just for a change, how about you give us a more serious comment - supported by some numbers.
Other wise reading your posts became a pretty boring chore...
For example, I simply can' see how you can just accept this
"As the plasma spheres receive this current, critical limit will be met causing the double layers (capacitors) to release outbursts. The system is at the complete mercy of the electrical environment..."
And you are just walking over my challenges to explain frequency stability of those systems (up to 10^-14 !!!!).
Not to mention that the behaviour of this "capacitor" of yours is very doubtful, assuming the stellar size of it.
19-10-2010, 08:09 PM
Correct it's a qualitative prediction of the ES pulsar model... I'm not sold on the gravitational collapse theory, or neutron matter star theory, or now these new cracks that can appear to let the hidden magnetic dynamo out.
Just seems like were invoking alot of unverified phenomena with yet more adhock attachments. Epicycles.
To me the stability will be provided by a resonance of the electrical circuit, much like a tank circuit... Quantitative detail of frequency stability is something i'll explore further. I aknowledge this is the remaining key difficulty of yours i have not addressed in detail yet. These questions are valuable for me Bojan, i thank you for them.
now.. Double layers *do* store vast amounts of electrical energy, this has been empirically verified from lab to solar scales, so i have no concern there with cosmic scales of plasma double layers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_layer_%28plasma%29).
If you're happy with the gravitationally collapsed, hypothetical super dense matter, with rotational frequency 'glitch' star quakes, and now cracks that let the forever hidden dynamo out - model, then all the best to you.
Qualitatively an interrupted resonant electrical circuit is infinitely closer to verified empirical physical processes for me. This article is another example of these qualitative expectations, and i'm happy to explore a cosmology built from physical processes that do exist.
19-10-2010, 08:24 PM
So, from the PU ‘Plasma Scaling’ link you sent the other day, it says:
So, according to PU, there are many, many aspects of Plasma laboratory modeling/testing which cannot be demonstrated in the lab.
From this, it would seem unlikely that you could demonstrate your pulsar model in a ‘scaled down’ version in the lab. The only option I can see for the Relaxation Oscillator hypothesis, is a purely theoretical approach, using physics and mathematical models …
These two pieces of information seem to be at odds with each other when discussing Relaxation Oscillators emitting pulsar levels of radiation and exhibiting stabilities in the order of the magnitudes mentioned by Bojan. The leap between lab models and real-life pulsar phenomena would seem far from trivial.
Can you explain the discrepancy and fill in the blanks ?
19-10-2010, 09:40 PM
No way, Alex.
In the course of my work as RF engineer I simply know from 35+ years experience that NO tank circuity can provide such a stability - it never happened and it never will. And there are many good theoretical analysis available on many web pages and textbooks on this issue.
If a tank circuit is for you a good enough explanation for frequency stability, then I'm afraid I must say you don't know what you are talking about.
As I mentioned earlier (in another thread ? ) the most stable frequency-wise electronic oscillators have MECHANICAL control elements (crystals) which are stable enough and and have Q-factor high enough to provide reasonable stability. Atomic clocks are way better (and better than pulsars), but they are not electronics oscillators in principle..
Your relaxation oscillator (with discharge tube) is tens of orders on magnitude worse it terms of stability than quartz oscillators..
On the other hand, fast rotating object is a good explanation of such phenomena.. much, much better model than relaxation oscillator, anyway.
Of course, if we assume that pulsars are electronics oscillators.. with external power etc.. why not conclude immediately that they are actually beacons built by advanced civilisations.. to help their space fleet to navigate through Galaxy :-) (BTW, this may be helpful one day for humans as well.. and it won't matter if pulsars are artificial, or rotating or whatever their nature may be).
How the discharge can happen UNIFORMLY throughout the whole thing (of stellar size !!), and in REPEATABLE way, every time..(again, with (observed !!) accuracy better than 10^-13 !!!!!) Did you think about recovery process? How it is possible that it is so fast (milliseconds... and that could tell us also something about its size.. what do you think, how big (or small) this system is? ) ?
Discharge is VERY chaotic process.. just look at lightning. You never know when and where it will strike. Far from being repeatable.
20-10-2010, 07:40 AM
There is a simple way of refuting this relaxation oscillator nonsense, observation.
A relaxation oscillator or blinking star is emitting spherical radiation (ie radiation is being emitted in all directions), in a pulsar the beam of radiation is rotating around a perpendicular axis.
If the object in the Crab Nebula is a blinking star the spherical radiation will reflect off the surrounding dust and form light echoes.
No such phenomena is observed!!!
20-10-2010, 09:09 AM
Good point. However...
A question from me now (I am now in Alex's mode :P).
Instead of expected onion-shape [BTW, layers of light for millisecond pulsating are expected to be very thin (1 ms equals ~300km), objects that small are not observable from those distances],we should be able to see some sort of bright ring, where rotating beam is hitting the shell of previously ejected material from a progenitor star.
Would the bright rings observed at SN 1987A in LMC be a good explanation for this?
This is also a question/point for Alex: 300km = 1ms.
The size of millisecond relaxation oscillator can not be larger than 300km in diameter.
The discharge in any material starts at random place(s) and then it propagates from there with the speed lower than c.
The recovery is also random-chaotic process, it includes cooling (significant temperature drop, recombination...) and it takes much longer time than discharge.. (This is why UJT, SCR's, thyratrons, neon tubes and similar are such a lousy oscillators).
All this tells us a lot about sizes involved in the process.
I tried to put this bug in Alex's ear earlier. but he didn't react, so now I am more direct - millisecond pulsar simply MUST be a VERY compact object in astronomical terms, whatever it's nature may be.
Rotating neutron star with two beams is (again) much more plausible model, contrary to relaxation oscillator explanation which is just an interesting mind game played by bored (or frustrated) electronics engineers.
20-10-2010, 09:43 AM
The duration of the pulse (~1ms) is a function of the circuit tuning parameters. The physical size/geometry of the components, whilst related, doesn't directly correlate with the pulse duration. I'm not clear on what you're saying here.
Can you explain ?
20-10-2010, 10:35 AM
What you are talking about is ideal circuit, with lumped elements - meaning, the component properties (capacitance, inductance, resistance etcetera ) are concentrated in infinitely small spaces.
However (what is often ignored by non-RF people) when you move to higher frequencies (or the size of the circuit becomes comparable to the 1/4 wavelength of the frequencies involved) we are dealing with circuit with distributed parameters.
In other words, the things become much more complicated, and the circuit components are no more simple - for example, you may find a capacitor is actually a weird combination of number of capacitances, inductances and resistors.. all that can be sometimes modelled by equivalent schematic, or, what is more practical, we just take s-parameters of the component, valid for certain frequency range, and we are not bothered with actual physical component (black box approach).
So, the duration of 1ms in a circuit 300km size is VERY significant. The circuit will behave completely different from small PCB on the bench, even if values are the same.
20-10-2010, 10:58 AM
And what you're saying is that the 'equivalent circuit' required to achieve stability at the ~1ms pulse frequency is far more complicated than the one Alex has forwarded us.
Let's not go further on this .. this is Alex's model, and be both know we could design it all for him. But as Steven (& Carl) have pointed out, there is no astronomical behavioural evidence to support the concept of active behaviour of 'electrical analogous components' (plasma double layer capacitors, etc) in the first place … I have pointed out that it cannot even be modelled in the lab, using the plasma scaling transformations developed by Alven etc .. you have pointed out that the stability of ROs is inadequate.
That should suffice.
20-10-2010, 11:07 AM
The frequency stability of RO is determined not only by equivalent circuit components values - which will always be idealised and, linear.
RO is non-linear circuit. and it's behaviour, among other things, depends also on physical processes going on in its components.
And that is so complicated sometimes, that it can't be properly modelled..
All that can be said about this here is that the expected frequency stability of the best possible RO (cosmic or the one on the test bench) is tens of orders of magnitude lower than those observed at pulsars (together with their 'star-quake' glitches included).
20-10-2010, 11:38 AM
You would not be able to observe a light echo from a rotating beam. The echo is a function of the expanding wave front perpendicular to the observer, not the shape of the intervening matter.
A rotating beam sweeps out a disk. Since we can observe the pulsar, our line of sight corresponds to the edge of the disk. Hence we would not be see a light echo.
If on the other hand the pulsar is sending out spherically expanding wavefronts (pulses) then there exists a wavefront perpendicular to our line of sight. If there is matter between the observer and the pulsar, the size of the echo is a function of the distance travelled by the wavefront.
Malin's famous light echo rings of SN 1987A highlight the mechanism.
The two light echo rings correspond to the presence of two separate sheets of intervening matter. The larger ring is due to matter closer to Earth, the component of spherical wavefront perpendicular to the Earth has travelled further resulting in the larger ring.
Note the spherically expanding wavefront is due to the supernova blast itself. To date there is no evidence of a neutron star let alone a pulsar.
20-10-2010, 11:59 AM
Well, that's my point: The distance between wave fronts of individual consecutive pulses is ~300km for 1millisecond flashes.
This can't possibly be detected.
Despite the fact that rotating beam forms a disk, I still think we should be able to see (in principle) an illuminated ring (or fragments of it), provided the rotating beam is hitting the inside of a slow expanding hollow spherical shell.
20-10-2010, 01:52 PM
It has nothing to do with the period of the pulses. It's the distance travelled by each individual pulse through a medium. Think of the pulse as a cone shape. The diameter of the cone represents the light echo. The longer the cone, the greater the distance travelled in the medium, the larger the light echo. The fact that there is a small period between each pulse is immaterial, the first pulse emitted forms the outer edge of the light echo. Each successive pulse will lead to a "filled in" light echo.
We don't observe such beasts.
How can this be. The thickness of the disk is very small even after taking into account diffraction effects on the beam. As an observer in the plane of the disk, the best we can hope to see is a small illuminated region on either side of the pulsar, and that is not possible given it is well beyond the resolution of our telescopes.
20-10-2010, 02:13 PM
I'm having a lot of trouble trying to understand the baseline geometry of where both of you are coming from. (That might just be me, though). There's a good chance that you guys have different orientations in mind ?
Anyway, I've got a question ...
How do we know when we are looking at a pulsar, that we aren't seeing multiple light pulses per single revolution of the neutron ?
The assumption seems to be that the light beam has two poles (and presumably, we see only one of them because of our orientation to the beam).
Do we know for certain that there are only two poles ? If there were more, we'd see an increase in the pulse frequency.. leading to ever increasing theoretical rotation rates.
PS: Like a big mirror ball flashing at you in a disco ?
20-10-2010, 03:33 PM
Of course I do understand the concept..
I just tried to point out there is no way to distinguish between the train of pulses from one single long brightening (like in this example you gave us earlier - V838 Monocerotis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V838_Monocerotis). It could have been flashing very fast during the outburst, but the effect we have now would have been the same).
Well, I do agree the intensity of such illuminated ring would be small.
That's why I sad:
20-10-2010, 03:47 PM
Moving right along .. (feel free to continue the other conversation however, guys) ..
I found another recent (peer reviewed) paper (http://arxiv.org/abs/1010.0614v1) which analyses the poloidal/toroidal field interaction wrt the oscillation emissions. These guys even propose to use the flare phenomenon from magnetars, as a way of probing the physics of the interior physics of Neutron Stars.
They discuss the nature of magnetic instabilities and oscillations in magnetars and pulsars, and find an ‘Alfven mode’ which has a frequency comparable with observed magnetar QPOs.
Their modelled poloidal fields also exhibit instabilities, observable via oscillations. There is a balance which can be struck between poloidal/toroidal components to explain variations in oscillations.
They conclude with a proposal to study the stability and oscillation spectra of the modelled mixed-field configurations, in a future study, and compare these with real-life Neutron Star observations.
This appears to be the ‘state-of-the-art’ modelling wrt Neutron/ Pulsars/Magnetars and to my way of thinking, explains with an ever increasing better fit, the behaviours of these objects.
20-10-2010, 05:35 PM
Having just done a scout around, I have a feeling that this possibility:
i) may not be needed to explain observations to date (in other words, a two pole light beam suffices in the presently accepted Pulsar model) and;
ii) if calculated spin rates (based on observations) ever exceed the theoretical spin maximum of ~1500 per sec they may then consider more exotic topologies.
Happy to be corrected on any of this, in going forward.
PS: Are you losin it when you start to answer your own questions ? :)
20-10-2010, 05:45 PM
No.. that means you are actually using your grey matter :thumbsup:
21-10-2010, 09:52 AM
Where did you get the relaxation oscillator is emitting spherically?
21-10-2010, 09:59 AM
Seems this would be a reasonable assumption.
Its your model Alex .. can you tell us the shape you're assuming ?
We have so little to go on .. its up to you to describe it for us.
21-10-2010, 10:04 AM
lets explore it then, because i see some very big differences between your and stevens projected assumptions and the literature of alfven, peratt, etc.
A mechanical or resonant component to the discharge is aknowledged as a potential contributor, pulsars are turning out to be observed as closely orbiting binaries. Thornhill has hypothesis a fission process.
Except it invents new physics beyond any experimental verification. Can you send me a link for a gravitationally bound neutron matter experiment? Better still, an experiment of any stable confinement of neutrons.
Like Paul La Violette? I can't say i'm convinced but it's an interesting hypothesis.
No this is not proposed, you inserted a UNIFORMLY dispersed discharge assumption. Steven inserted spherical emission. This is not in any part of the literature.
Yes lets look at lightning, lets look at the waveform match of an arc-mode plasma discharge. Match.
21-10-2010, 10:05 AM
I was just re-reading up on the Wiki double plasma reference you left us with the other day, also. I notice that the relativistic jets of pulsars can form double plasma layers and thus behave as a capacitor. There must be plasma around these objects but as far as them not being massive .. ??
In your model, what causes the plasma to gather to form a capacitance layer?
21-10-2010, 10:14 AM
Can you send a link which shows a scaled down lab experiment for the pulsar/double layer capacitor ? Given that the field strengths or most plasma behaviour parameters cannot be scaled down because the magnitudes cannot be simulated in the lab (according to PC/Wiki link you sent the other day).
If its working in 'arc mode', where's the synchrotron emission spectra for ALL pulsars/neutron stars ?? (I can only confirm such for M1).
Seriously though, I can see that plasma capacitors playing a major role in the relativistic jets, but something has to have caused these. I cannot yet understand (I don't think you've explained) where these come from in the first place ? Or am I missing something ?
PS: Did Harry Costas get lynched (also) following his comment the other day ?
21-10-2010, 10:18 AM
Craig plasma makes up 99.99% of the universe by volume. It's everywhere we've sent probes. Ofcourse the pulsar has plasma all around it this is part of both models.
"in my model what causes the plasma to gather to form a capacitance layer"
No this is a property of double layers and plasma, to capacitive.
What causes the gathering? Again... this is a property of plasma and electric currents...
What causes the plasma to "gather" when you turn on a plasma ball?
(hint, happens when you plug it in)
21-10-2010, 10:20 AM
And how else it can emit except in all directions???
Nice try, mate.
Exceptional observation results need exceptional (but still plausible) explanations...
However, I am still waiting for your experimental verification of frequency stable relaxation oscillator (even 1ppm (10^-6) will do as a start... from there it will be a piece of cake to reach 10^-13.. just 7 orders of magnitude to go ).
Match? I don't think so. And this is not what I asked/hinted.
21-10-2010, 10:21 AM
So in the context of a pulsar/magnetar, what causes the double layering in that specific vicinity ?
21-10-2010, 10:23 AM
21-10-2010, 10:24 AM
But why in that specific location ? Why not somewhere else ?
21-10-2010, 10:29 AM
It is not good enough to say "it is a property of plasma.."
However it seems it's a property of Alex to say and write such things ;)..
21-10-2010, 10:33 AM
Could you turn off invisibility mode so we can see your name in the member's list … and use this to give you a chance to respond ??
I've got so many questions for ya .. don't want to swamp ya.
PS: We won't bite ya !! (Too hard anyway ) … also gives us a chance to go and do other important things .. once you go .. like lunch , coffee, work, life, etc ..
21-10-2010, 10:38 AM
Z pinch also requires high field strengths … either from an external source or self induced by the plasma. So which is it that causes it in your model ?
21-10-2010, 12:52 PM
This is a perfect example why a pseudoscience such as yours implodes under it's own contradictions.
Novae are relaxation oscillators (according to EU proponents)
Novae embedded in gas and dust are observed with light echoes.
Light echoes are the result of spherical radiation.
Conclusion: Relaxation oscillators must emit spherical radiation.
Yet pulsars do not exhibit light echos. So they cannot be relaxation oscillators as they do not emit spherical radiation.
Of course since your philosophy is to deny that anything new can be discovered and everything in the Universe is explained via engineering principles you can put a giant reflector behind the oscillator to get the desired result.
21-10-2010, 01:25 PM
As another aside (until Alex responds), I found yet another interesting paper published in 2003 by an F. C. Michel called "The State of Pusar Theory" (http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0308347v1).
Be warned .. the guy who wrote this paper has a big agenda. I haven't quite figured out what it is, just yet. (So please don't complain about the spin orientation).
The paper starts off philosophically (the opposite of most of our threads). He distinguishes what he's observed over his years of involvement in Pulsar work:
1. Searching for the quick kill (theorists).
2. Maintaining community solidarity (observers).
3. Exaggerate even the smallest incremental advance.
4. Indifferent to theoretical disputes.
5. Much of pulsar data are private.
6. No one can correctly assume that their “new” idea is actually new.
The paper is actually about plasma circulations in the poles/equatorial regions of pulsars.
It was a controversial issue in 2003 and it is clearly maintains this status thru to today.
29-10-2010, 03:19 PM
Yes, this is the EU model. Intergalactic currents --> galactic current circuit --> electric star
see Alfven's galactic circuit model, also see Alfvens stellar circuit
This was later expanded by Jeurgens to the ES.
Bite all you want, they are not my models, they are model developed from professional scientists and engineers, which yes are different to gravity dominated cosmology. I totally aknowledge it may cause some with particular 'schooling' some discomfort.
If you prefer strange matter, quark stars, neutron stars etc... then all the best to you, i'd just like to see some lab verification of these processes.
PS: Costa's has some interesting papers on phase transitions and condensed matter, although as you see they are currently void of an explanation for these observations. ES expects them.
29-10-2010, 03:23 PM
yet another perfect example of gross misconceptions.
"Novae are relaxation oscillators (according to EU proponents) "
Again where do you get this? How is this sentence remotely logical? sources?
Novae is a result of a star under immense electrical stress... it is an exploding double layer.
How could this possibly be in a resonant electrical state? (relaxation oscillator). It's nothing like one?
So so far off the page...
29-10-2010, 03:30 PM
What's a Gamma Ray Burst (GRB) in EU/PC speak ?
29-10-2010, 03:37 PM
Do you think lab verification of double layer plasma relaxation oscillators is possible ?
What would be the test conditions of these ?
(Not having a go at you here .. I just can't understand how this model can exist in EU/PC, given the magnitudes of field strengths required for it all. Ie: as per my previous comments re: unfeasibility of plasma experiment scaling).
29-10-2010, 03:41 PM
Seems a similar event. Electrical stress, explosion, settling into a binary pair.
29-10-2010, 03:41 PM
And this is even farther out, I am afraid
BTW, how do you explain the decay curve of a nova?
Alex, those may not be "your" models - in terms you didn't originally propose them.
But, you are advocating them and you are doing this very enthusiastically.. So you have to accept certain level of responsibility, together with bites.
29-10-2010, 03:46 PM
Ok. (I hate looking at EC pages … its really hard on the eyes) ..
Getting back to the 'electrical stress' leading to the explosion bit .. what about Fusion/Nucleosynthesis etc leading to carbon and iron ? EU/PC doesn't accept this part of the mainstream theory ?
If not what's the analogous explanation ?
29-10-2010, 03:50 PM
I agree with Bojan.
Let's get clear about what we're talking about when we use the term 'your models'.
We haven't seen any PC, (or EU), layed out, documented theories explaining the relaxation oscillator. Until I see this, this theory is all Alex's.
29-10-2010, 03:55 PM
Plasma scaling is empirically verified. I do not share the same concerns of infeasibility concerns as the dipole morphology of observations can only be explained by electromagnetism (since gravity and neutral gas doesn't behave this way)... plasma is nature's conductor. Saying that, i'm totally happy to explore your concerns, can only be beneficial to me.
The solar relaxation oscillator circuit experiment.... well the physical processes surely are lab verifiable, and the science is engineering science. It sure would be a great experiment to achieve, i'm not sure we would end up with a blinking terella, since it would more be a transient lightning machine. Relaxation oscillators are very easy to make, but i'm really interested to get more information on detailed Bojan's frequency concerns, i will explore as time permits and i come across literature.
Regarding Scaling... This why i follow Lerner's work, not from the energy production angle (which granted is exciting), rather his experiments are showing identical emission characteristics to solar flares.
Yet more 'scaling' verification.
I also suspect that you are expecting to 'observe' field strengths that we may not be able to physically measure. That is, without doinking a probe into it. This applies especially for electric fields. An example of this might be, we did not empirically verify (observe) the giant birkeland currents flowing between Saturn & moons, until we flew a prob through them.
29-10-2010, 03:57 PM
You know, I reckon you should write a paper on how the RElaxation Oscillator comes toegther to do what you say it does, Alex.
Many times I've had ideas and its not until you actually write a paper that you start to realise the holes in it all. Its actually good practice. It helps to get it off the ground. Much more efficient than this process.
29-10-2010, 04:06 PM
I wish they were mine.
29-10-2010, 04:24 PM
"When I was researching topics for this article, Wal Thornhill said to me,
"Have a look at variable stars, particularly bursters, where I think you will find the brightness curve is like that of lightning with a sudden rise time and exponential decay. Some stars are regular and others irregular. The irregular ones seem to average the power over the bursts. When they are more frequent, the energy is less per burst. If there is a long latency, the next burst is more powerful. It's the kind of thing you would expect from an electrical circuit when the trigger level is variable and the power input constant.
I think many variable stars are actually binaries with some kind of electrical interaction. Long period Miras (A type of variable star) may actually have an object orbiting within the shell of a red giant (as I have proposed for the proto-Saturnian system)"
Following Wal's suggestion, I looked at the recent Hubble image of Mira itself, the flagship star of that class of variable stars. Mira's image reveals a huge plasma emission on one side of the star. The official explanation includes the words, " Mira A is a red giant star undergoing dramatic pulsations, causing it to become more than 100 times brighter over the course of a year. …. Mira can extend to over 700 times the size of our Sun, and is only 400 light-years away. The …. photograph taken by the Hubble Space Telescope shows the true face of Mira. But what are we seeing? The unusual extended feature off the lower left of the star remains somewhat mysterious. Possible explanations include gravitational perturbation and/or heating from Mira's white dwarf star companion." [Italics added.]
Mira has a white dwarf companion, just as Wal suggested was likely. So, a much better possible explanation of its pulsating output is that an electrical discharge is taking place between Mira and its companion, much like a relaxation oscillator. It's not really "mysterious" at all. There are many examples of unequally sized, closely spaced, binary pairs that are variable and emit frequent nova-like explosions. The list includes:
SS Cygni - A yellow dwarf and a hot blue-white dwarf. Orbital period 6.5 hours! Separation distance 100.000 miles or less. Burnham asks, "Is SS Cygni ..... dying out after having been [a full scale nova] in the past?"
U Geminorum - A B-type blue dwarf and a G-type dwarf. Orbital period 4.5 hours! Separation distance a few hundred thousand miles. In this case Burnham states, "Spectroscopic studies reveal the existence of a "rotating ring of gas" (plasma) around the blue star, and it appears that the explosive increase of light is due not only to the brightening of the star, but to a large increase of radiation from the cloud."
Z Andromedae and R Aquarii - Both of these consist of a hot blue dwarf mated to a red giant.
T Coronae and RS Ophiuchi - Both have recurrent nova-like eruptions and are close binary systems"
29-10-2010, 04:33 PM
You mean the rapid rise and exponential decay? like a lightning flash yeah?
Successful Predictions of the Electrical Discharge Theory of Cosmic Atmospheric Phenomena and Universal Evolution
see 3.9 Novae
It is completely unfair for me to accept any responsibility or credit for these theories or works. Far greater men are responsible.
However if you see some point in.. or harbor a desire to bite 'a messenger' per'se, go for it, whatever works for you.
29-10-2010, 04:47 PM
Rapid rise and slower decay yes.. but not as during lightening.
What I meant, the decay time VERY closely corresponds to half-life time of certain radioactive elements and isotopes (found in spectra of novae btw).
This (creation of those elements and isotopes) can't be explained by any electrical activity - there is not enough energy levels involved.
As for "responsibility", let me rephrase: If you are advocating certain ideas, people expect you to understand in depth what you are talking about, and they are asking you questions.. and if you can't give them satisfactory answers.. you tell me what could be the logical conclusion from this.
So here you go..
29-10-2010, 05:03 PM
"This (creation of those elements and isotopes) can't be explained by any electrical activity - there is not enough energy levels involved."
So gravitationally compressed gas is enough? please.
You do realize that all fusion experiments on this planet are using magnetically confined plasma to produce fusion.
They are ALL electrically driven experiments.
29-10-2010, 05:10 PM
Man, all that's been said here, (in Steven's post), in a very anecdotal way is that these systems exhibit "nova-like eruptions" and "I think many variable stars are actually binaries with some kind of electrical interaction".
The first statement is just an analogy and the second statement is just a thought.
I'm still looking for a proper, formal description of the mechanisms behind this thing.
Sorry Alex … I'm frustrated with the lack of proper backing behind this Relaxation Oscillator pub-conversation.
29-10-2010, 05:13 PM
Re SJ: Thanks, yes i see nova-like... Yes they are relaxation emissions.
My confusion was that the pulsar is obviously a highly resonant system, these nova-like emissions do not seem to be in as resonant state, and would be a different physical phenomena. This does not discount that both are electrically driven.
Quite correct, these nova-like explosions are yes 'relaxing' emissions. A CME could be a relaxing emission and we could include others, Auroral outbursts could be, lightning is, etc all which are not or as resonantly dominated.
I still do not see a connection between pulsars and any claimed spherical emissions? Only a connection that an electrical relaxation process may be involved their power.
29-10-2010, 05:17 PM
Huh ?? Are we that far out of synch ??? Goodness, me !!
Do these experiments produce new elements ??
C'mon Alex you can do better than this !!
29-10-2010, 05:29 PM
Seems we are Craig. EU does not exclude fusion occuring.
Where is Bojan seeing differences in nova between the models?
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.