Colliding Stars?

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Locked
User avatar
junglelord
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Colliding Stars?

Unread post by junglelord » Fri Dec 25, 2009 2:25 am

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/photo/vie ... outh/42900
Stars Find Fountain of Youth

In a star cluster called Messier 30 (pictured), about 28,000 light-years away, certain older stars have rejuvenated themselves by practicing "vampirism" on companion stars, siphoning fresh hydrogen. Recent imaging from Hubble has indicated a second way stars stay young-- through colliding with each other, which re-ignites their nuclear fuel.

Mysterious old stars that look oddly young found the fountain of youth via two means, new research finds. Some rely on vampirism to suck the life out of a companion star, while others are rejuvenated in cosmic collisions.

The strange stars exist among a tight group of stellar geezers in what's called a globular cluster. The whole setup called Messier 30 – an ancient knot of stars sitting 28,000 light-years away and within our Milky Way galaxy – is thought to have hit the scene about 13 billion years ago, when the universe was an infant.

Most of the stars look their age, bloated red giants that are about to call it quits. But a few, called blue stragglers, seem to have regained their youth. They look very much like hot young things.

"It's like seeing a few kids in the group picture of a rest-home for retired people," said Francesco Ferraro of the University of Bologna in Italy. "It is natural to wonder why they are there."

For nearly 50 years, astronomers have known of these blue stragglers. The leading theory to explain them is vampirism.

It works like this: Two stars orbit each other in a tight setup. The less massive one siphons fresh hydrogen from its more massive companion star, just as a vampire would suck blood from a lover. The new fuel causes the smaller star to heat up, growing bluer — known signs of a stellar hottie.

However, when Ferraro and colleagues used the Hubble Space Telescope to study the blue stragglers, they found two distinct populations, suggesting an alternate path to immortality.

In the new scenario, two stars collide nearly head-on, mixing their nuclear fuel to restart the fires of cosmic youth.


http://www.livescience.com/common/media ... ars_collid

"Our observations demonstrate that blue stragglers formed by collisions have slightly different properties from those formed by vampirism," said study team member Giacomo Beccari from the European Space Agency. "This provides a direct demonstration that the two formation scenarios are valid and that they are both operating simultaneously in this cluster."

The results are detailed in the Dec. 24 issue of the journal Nature.

The astronomers also found that blue stragglers are much more concentrated toward the center of the cluster, compared with other stars that are spread throughout the cluster.

"This indicates that blue stragglers are more massive than the average star in this cluster," Ferraro said. "More massive stars tend to sink deep into the cluster the way a billiard ball would sink in a bucket of honey."

In fact the central area of the cluster is quite crowded, so star pairing and collisions are to be expected. Also, more massive stars near the cluster's center are exactly what would be expected from both the vampire model (because it involves the heft of two stars) and from mergers resulting from collisions.

Here's what researchers figure happened:

About 2 billion years ago, the core of Messier 30 collapsed, throwing stars toward the center. More collisions occurred, generating more of the newfound type of blue straggler. The same growing crowd perturbed the two-star setups, fueling vampirism.

"Almost 10 percent of galactic globular clusters have experienced core collapse, but this is the first time that we see the effect of the core collapse imprinted on a stellar population," said team member Barbara Lanzoni of the University of Bologna.
Stars which are electric can will change luminosity based on incoming current....not just on their conditions of vampire or collision....if in fact they do collide or act as vampires.

Merry Christmas EU.
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord

User avatar
StevenO
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Colliding Stars?

Unread post by StevenO » Fri Dec 25, 2009 6:00 am

Dewey Larson stated astronomers have their Stellar evolution sequence upside down. Globular clusters are actually breeding places of young stars. Stars start out as dust clouds, slowly contracting gravitationally while converting their potential energy into heat until they start glowing in infrared, become red giants and move into the main sequence or, if they have much accretion develop into blue giants that are prone to supernova after which one part starts over at the bottom of the main sequence and another part turns into white dwarf. These are the "blue stragglers".

No proof of this all off course since our lives are to short to witness this, but it makes me smile when I read "It's like seeing a few kids in the group picture of a rest-home for retired people" or theories about vampirism.

Astronomers, the new mystics. ;)
First, God decided he was lonely. Then it got out of hand. Now we have this mess called life...
The past is out of date. Start living your future. Align with your dreams. Now execute.

Osmosis
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:52 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: Colliding Stars?

Unread post by Osmosis » Fri Dec 25, 2009 11:02 am

Yes, complete with cloaks, pointy hats and dancing brooms :D :D :D

User avatar
nick c
Site Admin
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Colliding Stars?

Unread post by nick c » Fri Dec 25, 2009 5:09 pm

StevenO wrote:Dewey Larson stated astronomers have their Stellar evolution sequence upside down. Globular clusters are actually breeding places of young stars. Stars start out as dust clouds, slowly contracting gravitationally while converting their potential energy into heat until they start glowing in infrared, become red giants and move into the main sequence or, if they have much accretion develop into blue giants that are prone to supernova after which one part starts over at the bottom of the main sequence and another part turns into white dwarf. These are the "blue stragglers".
The EU would be opposed to this as much as the mainstream astonomy position. Stars form through a z pinch process (or fissioning) not gravitational collapse. The Hertzsprung Russell diagram is not an indicator of age but of the degree of electrical stress upon the star in conjunction with its' size.
As the Electric Star hypothesis reveals: "there is no reason to attribute youth to one spectral type over another. We conclude that a star's location on the HR diagram only depends on its size and the electric current density it is presently experiencing...its age remains indeterminate regardless of its mass or spectral type.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/ ... 4stars.htm
StevenO wrote:No proof of this all off course since our lives are to short to witness this,
Stars have been observed to change spectral type in very short periods. There are some ancient descriptions of common stars being of different color then they are today, and also there have been several examples of stars changing spectral type in the era of modern astronomy. [url2=http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg1 ... etime.html]FG Sagittae [/url2]is a good example. In the course of the 20th C it changed its' position on the Hertsprung-Russell diagram several times, from a B type (Blue) star to G (yellow).
In 1955, the first time that astronomers measured FG Sagittae's spectral type, the star was a B (blue) star. Even then, though, the temperature of the star was dropping and its spectral type was changing: in the early 1960s, the star became spectral type A (white), and by the end of the decade, the spectral type was F (yellow-white). The star continued to cool during the 1970s, when it became a G star similar in colour and temperature to the Sun. It remains a G star today.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg1 ... etime.html
This has left mainstream scrambling for ad hoc explanations, calling upon an unexplained expansion to account for the rapid evolution of FG Sagittae.
But as Don Scott has noted:
The star FG Sagittae breaks all the rules of accepted stellar evolution. FG Sagittae has changed from blue to yellow since 1955! It, quite recently, has taken a deep dive in luminosity. FG Sagittae, is the central star of the planetary nebula (nova remnant?) He 1-5. It is a unique object in the sense that for this star we have direct evidence of stellar evolution but in a time scale comparable with the human lifetime. [CCD Astronomy, Summer 1996, p.40.]
"Around 1900 FG Sge was an inconspicuous hot star (T = 50,000 K) of magnitude 13. During the next 60 years it cooled to about 8000 K and brightened in the visual region to magnitude 9, as its radiation shifted from the far-UV to the visual region. Around 1970 a whole new bunch of spectral lines appeared due to elements such as Sr, Y, Zr, Ba and rare earths. .... The star cooled further in the 1970s and 80s and then all of a sudden in 1992 its magnitude dropped to 14. Further drops occurred from 1992 to 1996 with a very deep minimum near magnitude 16 in June of 1996." [Italics added]

So, after abruptly brightening by four magnitudes, it has dropped seven magnitudes. From the end of the last century FG Sagittae has moved across the HR diagram changing from a normal hot giant to a "late spectral type" (cool) star with marked changes in its surface chemical composition. Its present surface temperature is in the range of 4000K. This is not the kind of slow stellar 'evolution' mainstream astrophysicists preach.

And FG Sagittae is a binary pair!

The official wording was, "In 1995 FG Sge changed in brightness in a quite sporadic manner from V~10.5 to ~13.0 according to the data by Hungarian Astronomical Association-Variable Star Section. During the spectral observations on 9/10 and 10/11 August, FG Sge was very faint (HAA-VSS data: V~12.5-13.0, according to Variable Stars Observers' League of Japan: ~13.3) and therefore erroneously the visual companion 8'' apart from FG Sge was actually observed. This is probably the first high resolution spectrum of the companion ever obtained. The spectrum turned out to correspond to a quite normal giant with the spectral type around K0."

Is FG Sagittae an example of the binary fissioning (caused by electrical stress) that was described above? It seems to have all the basic characteristics: nova-like brightening followed by loss of luminosity and loss of temperature - moving to a different spectral type with marked changes in its surface chemical composition, discovery of a binary companion, and the entire systems lies within a nebulous nova remnant

http://www.electric-cosmos.org/hrdiagr.htm
So the article in the OP about the globular cluster, M30, containing old stars or young stars, or vampire, (or werewolf, unicorn, or gnome stars) is dealing in irrelevencies because the understanding of what powers stars is misunderstood.

Nick

User avatar
junglelord
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: Colliding Stars?

Unread post by junglelord » Fri Dec 25, 2009 6:12 pm

Well said Nick.
8-)
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord

User avatar
FS3
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:44 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

"Mating" White Dwarfs create Supernovae

Unread post by FS3 » Tue Jan 12, 2010 2:49 am

According to a new simulation by the German MPA, Munich type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) are thought to result from thermonuclear explosions of white dwarf stars. It has long been suspected that the merger of two white dwarfs could give rise to a type Ia event, but hitherto simulations have failed to produce an explosion.

The latest paper shows a simulation of the merger of two equal-mass white dwarfs that leads to that required "underluminous explosion":

Image

From the paper "Sub-luminous type Ia supernovae from the mergers of equal-mass white dwarfs with M~0.9 M_sun" by the authors, Ruediger Pakmor, Markus Kromer, Friedrich K. Roepke, Stuart A. Sim, Ashley J. Ruiter, Wolfgang Hillebrandt (MPA Garching)

Isn't it interesting that this resembles very much the image of the well known merger of two Birkeland Currents?

:mrgreen:
FS3

User avatar
Siggy_G
Moderator
Posts: 501
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 11:05 am
Location: Norway

Re: Colliding Stars?

Unread post by Siggy_G » Tue Apr 06, 2010 6:02 am

Is it possible for stars to collide at all? Interacting: sure, but colliding?

If the Sun represents all stars, it is important to bare in mind that it has a magnetic heliosphere, of opposite charge than the Sun/star itself. If another star approaches with the same structure, wouldn't the two star systems repel each other, or interact almost like two cells? Of course, it would also depend on the amount of charge (magnetic repel) versus mass (gravitational attraction).

It would also depend on the velocity of the two stars. But the way I see it, stars aren't moving on individual and purely mechanical basis - they move in a "viscosity" manner, gradually interacting as a group (based on gravity, radiation and charge/magnetism... and distance). It seems unnatural that star systems, or bubbles which they are, of the same galaxy should be on front-to-front collision course and intersect.

( Related: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliospheric_current_sheet )

User avatar
junglelord
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: Colliding Stars?

Unread post by junglelord » Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:06 am

I have never heard an astronomer say a star is nonmagnetic.
Magnatism trumps gravity, every time.
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord

jjohnson
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:24 am
Location: Thurston County WA

Re: Colliding Stars?

Unread post by jjohnson » Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:48 am

I am pretty sure that there has been no direct, confirmed observation of a stellar collision, anywhere. That doesn't rule out some possibility that it might happen, but we haven't been observing long enough on this planet with good technical means to provide "film at 11" yet. Not counting supercomputer sims in stunning color...

If in the EU paradigm stars are formed within large, pinched filaments of electric currents, and are kept there in relative stability by a combination of (mostly) electro-magnetic fields and gravity, as long as the currents flow, and these light-year diameter currents keep themselves separated through double layers and Biot-Savart balancing mechanisms, then what plausible other mechanism is there that would cause stars to just run baji-naji into one another, even now and then?

Look at all the stars toward the center of just our galaxy. The orbits of some of the ones closest to the 'center' and one another have been plotted in all that chaos. No collisions in the popular press that I've ever read, over the years. Not even any evidence presented that "this star was here and it was moving toward where we think that ravenous black hole is supposed to be and then it just sort of disappeared." And if that sort of thing were actually observed just once, who here thinks for any longer than it takes to jerk your hand away from a hot stove that it wouldn't have gotten 78 point headlines in all the journals and magazines, from Science to Wired to The Enquirer?

Playing statistics, let's say the populations of galaxies range from a few hundred million stars in globular clusters upwards of 4 or 5 hundred billion stars in the largest ones, and that there are hundreds of billions of galaxies countable in just the observable universe. If stars moved randomly in sort of a large-scale Brownian motion equivalent, and gravity operated alone, maybe collisions might be possible. And if collisions were even that remotely possible, wouldn't we be able to see at least one certifiable collision in a century? Maybe a whole bunch of them whose light has taken billions of years to cross space and get to us here, now?

No one observes stars to collide and create a nova or supernova. Besides, there are other (EU) better and more plausible explanations for the sudden releases of large amounts of energy that astronomers term supernovas. Supernovas ARE observed; it is their cause which is open to debate. The actual causes, like so many issues in the remote science of astronomy, are mostly hypothesized. Collisions and catastrophic electrodynamic breakdowns are just two hypotheses of many. The latter is the only method which we have scaled down and actually observed in a measured, instrumented way here on Earth.

I've gotten silence or, "No, but..." responses any time I've raised the question of real observations of stars in collision with a real astronomer who would talk with me. A computer simulation is not an observation. It should be used like any other mathematical construct: in support of observations. Observations shed more light, once obtained, than all the uncountable numbers in heaven and earth.

If any of you have a pointer to evidence of an observation of a stellar collision I would be most interested in reading and evaluating it. Please.

User avatar
junglelord
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: Colliding Stars?

Unread post by junglelord » Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:15 am

Very good point about the center of the galaxy and non collisons.
:D

Of course they will go off, divide by zero, come back and say the black hole causes the fast rotation yet non sucking down the blackhole, non collision, round and round we go orbits, yeah right... merry go round time at the carnival.
Can I ride the horsey?
:P
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests