Hey now, to be fair, Star Trek was just paying homage to the Third Doctor from Doctor Who:
"Reverse the polarity of the neutron flow!"

Down in the front. I'll start by saying the Sift has transformed me. I came in as a staunch capitalist, fiscal conservative, bearing a self identity as a defender of the slightly right of center contingent. However, the politics and philosophy espoused on the Sift have transformed me. Some of the things I now believe;
Ann Coulter and Nancy Grace broom-pool together to work. They don't wear their spiky hats anymore because they blow off in the wind.
There are more physicists out there than I realized, or at least they don't fit the mold of retiring, quiet types. They are all too eager to tell us about elementary particles like neutrons, morons, and fig-newtons.
Americans still hold the constitution in high esteem and want to protect it.
George Bush is living proof of the Peter principle.

Long story short, I am now a staunch capitalist, fiscal conservative, bearing the self identify of a defender of the CENTER political contingent. So you can see I have been moved considerably. I wouldn't have guessed such dramatic change possible.

Oh, and I'm still the Site doctor. But, I still won't write erectile-dysfunction prescriptions, and I don't perform breast augmentation, although I will evaluate the quality of it if you so desire.

Speaking from the perspective of someone who came of age in the pre-computer era, otherwise known as the go-outside-and-play epoch, interaction on an international and world-wide level is something that could not have been imagined back then. How the world has changed. Could this be how the new generation finally finds commonality of interest and the ability to live together in harmony? I'm going home to write a song about it.

I'll take any suggestions on the style and genre it should be presented in. Bluegrass, jazz, blues, speed metal, electronica, or traditional Russian folk?
Nevermind, I've decided to write the New World symphony over. Classical it is. I need some volunteers for libretto.

I'm deeply indebted to you all, and the check is in the mail. Thanks.

It would be interesting to find out what chunks of material ejected from neutron stars would decay into, and what nuclides would be formed besides hydrogen. It could be the case that certain nuclides which are never formed in ordinary stars can be the product of neutron stars.

FAKE! The narrator said that the proton is the heaviest part of an atom, when in fact the neutron is slightly more massive. Geez, and I'm not even a physicist.
___________________________________

A marvel of science and *engineering, to be sure. And anything that deals with the Big Bang and black holes is *spacy in my book. Good find, kulpinator.

Isnt that the little one eyed guy from the movie Jimmy Neutron?

A rad tale about neutrons, morons, and fig-neutons. What particle is responsible for nocturnal emissions? I'm curie-ous.

re: velocity - The 64km/s (≈ 143000mph) is radial velocity, so I guess it's not relevant, but I can't find any reference to its linear(?) velocity, i.e., velocity relative to the material it's shedding.

I'm pretty confident it's not releasing energy on the scale of a supernova. Material from a supernova is ejected at much higher velocities (orders of magnitude greater). And doesn't the remaining neutron star or black hole continue to provide energy to the surrounding shell?

Benny Goodman = Elvis = The Beatles = Led Zepplin = Michael Jackson = Public Enemy = Nirvana = Radiohead = ????.............

woooooooaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh there horsey.. what!?

fans of each of these can adjust these comments because i'm not well versed in all but a few...
Benny Goodman, no idea - no comment
Elvis - more or less a crooner with elements of rock?
Beatles - guitar pop? and occasionally experimental
Led Zep - rock, experimental
Jackson - pop with attitude?
Public Enemey - who?
Nirvana - angsty grunge rock?
Radiohead - rock followed by completely experimental mixing styles and such

i don't want to get into some really really detailed shit here, because i'm not qualified for it... but surely calling those the same is a bit like saying all cars are exactly the same?

especially when you go directly from led zep to michael jackson.... double especially when you name pop and experimental stuff in the same sentence

i think that's mental

now go ahead and say "but they all follow the same chord progression timbre resonance factor!"... fair enough, but again that's like saying "every element in the periodic table is exactly the same because they are all made up of protons, neutrons and electrons" (do not start with me about string theory or quarks plz) - they have to be made up of the same things, just like a c sharp is the same as a b flat because they're both made up of compressions of air, and the only difference is how fast the compression occurs..

now if that's what you're saying - fair enough, you're right, but you need to get out more

otherwise please don't say they sound the same.. i'm not clinging to my generation, saying one is better than the other, more unique than the other... especially because i'm a fan of pink floyd and i'm far out of their generation.. but ....... dayum

I don't know, flavior, but neutron stars do give me a boner.

Did anyone else read this as "the erotic world of neutron stars"?

...

What can I say? I mean, you yourself have just denounced logic. That makes argument impossible by definition. Feel free to believe whatever you want, just do your best to not indoctrinate your children, or like, shape public policy that affects the real world, which actually does function on logic.

I guess my only question is this: why God and not Allah? Why not Zeus or Thor? With so many Gods to choose from, are you CERTAIN that yours is correct? How certain are you? Certain enough to try and spread your view of God to others? Certain enough to teach it to innocent children?

Anyway, sorry if I seem combatative, I really don't have any beef with you, and I know some very nice people with deep religious convictions. I don't happen to share these convictions, and that's fine. That's called living in an open society. Far be it from me to try and deny your belief that your neighbor is from another planet, or that your imaginary friend created the universe and loves you very much. But if you want to convince me that these things are true, an ancient book of tribal mythos won't help you. Especially not the bible, which has some very VERY nasty anecdotes in it indeed.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
I believe that God is perfect. Perfect. Humor me for a second and imagine a Perfect God. In six days (or in other words six periods of time), couldn't He have created (or "organized" if you translate it literally) binary stars, black holes, and Hawking radiation. Couldn't he have programmed the world to develop and "evolve" however he wanted it to, over millennia. Couldn't God have caused the "Big Bang."

My faith is not disproved by science, nor can it be. My faith is not based on logic, nor can it be. I believe in God because I have seen His hand in my life and have felt His spirit in my heart. No amount of Astronomy will ever change that. On the contrary, the more I learn of stars, planets, comets, and galaxies, the stronger my faith becomes. I realize more and more everyday how small and insignificant I am without my Faith in God, the Father, and in His son, Jesus Christ. Without Them, I am nothing.

In reply to this comment by djsunkid:
Does it involve a set of forces that explains the behavior of matter that is consistent on scales from 10 to ten to the power of 40?

Does it cover binary stars, black holes, and hawking radiation?

Does it say anything about neutron stars? I'd be interested in reading an ancient text that can tell us about objects in the universe that are SO dense, that a tablespoon of them weighs as much as the entire himalayas.

My point is, the universe is WAY more amazing than any mythos that has been dreamt up by man. We're just not configured to be able to imagine this stuff. Why would we be? A study of evolutionary psychology reveals much about why we are the way we are. Being able to intuitively grasp the dynamics of relativity is NOT adaptive for ancient man. We needed to develop math to figure out this shit.

So, tell me about your text. Does it have mind-bending philosophy? Does it want us to spend our lives looking at our navels? Count me out of those, please.



In reply to this comment by deedub81:
Have you read the ancient text I study from?

In reply to this comment by djsunkid:
Holy fucking shit. Modern cosmology is totally the religion killer. OK, virgin birth, yadda-yadda what ever. You think YOU'VE got miracles? Your ancient texts don't have SHIT on modern science, yo.

I believe that God is perfect. Perfect. Humor me for a second and imagine a Perfect God. In six days (or in other words six periods of time), couldn't He have created (or "organized" if you translate it literally) binary stars, black holes, and Hawking radiation. Couldn't he have programmed the world to develop and "evolve" however he wanted it to, over millennia. Couldn't God have caused the "Big Bang."

My faith is not disproved by science, nor can it be. My faith is not based on logic, nor can it be. I believe in God because I have seen His hand in my life and have felt His spirit in my heart. No amount of Astronomy will ever change that. On the contrary, the more I learn of stars, planets, comets, and galaxies, the stronger my faith becomes. I realize more and more everyday how small and insignificant I am without my Faith in God, the Father, and in His son, Jesus Christ. Without Them, I am nothing.

In reply to this comment by djsunkid:
Does it involve a set of forces that explains the behavior of matter that is consistent on scales from 10 to ten to the power of 40?

Does it cover binary stars, black holes, and hawking radiation?

Does it say anything about neutron stars? I'd be interested in reading an ancient text that can tell us about objects in the universe that are SO dense, that a tablespoon of them weighs as much as the entire himalayas.

My point is, the universe is WAY more amazing than any mythos that has been dreamt up by man. We're just not configured to be able to imagine this stuff. Why would we be? A study of evolutionary psychology reveals much about why we are the way we are. Being able to intuitively grasp the dynamics of relativity is NOT adaptive for ancient man. We needed to develop math to figure out this shit.

So, tell me about your text. Does it have mind-bending philosophy? Does it want us to spend our lives looking at our navels? Count me out of those, please.



In reply to this comment by deedub81:
Have you read the ancient text I study from?

In reply to this comment by djsunkid:
Holy fucking shit. Modern cosmology is totally the religion killer. OK, virgin birth, yadda-yadda what ever. You think YOU'VE got miracles? Your ancient texts don't have SHIT on modern science, yo.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
Have you read the ancient text I study from?


Does it involve a set of forces that explains the behavior of matter that is consistent on scales from 10 to ten to the power of 40?

Does it cover binary stars, black holes, and hawking radiation?

Does it say anything about neutron stars? I'd be interested in reading an ancient text that can tell us about objects in the universe that are SO dense, that a tablespoon of them weighs as much as the entire himalayas.

My point is, the universe is WAY more amazing than any mythos that has been dreamt up by man. We're just not configured to be able to imagine this stuff. Why would we be? A study of evolutionary psychology reveals much about why we are the way we are. Being able to intuitively grasp the dynamics of relativity is NOT adaptive for ancient man. We needed to develop math to figure out this shit.

So, tell me about your text. Does it have mind-bending philosophy? Does it want us to spend our lives looking at our navels? Count me out of those, please.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'neutron, stars, star, exotic, astronomy, physics, dense, heavy, weird' to 'neutron, stars, star, exotic, astronomy, physics, dense, heavy, weird, chandra, x ray' - edited by MarineGunrock

He's perfectly correct. There is no downside to living near one. All the neutron radiation emitted by the reactor is blocked by its concrete containment structure, magnetic fields can not escape the building and the reaction is incapable of going out of control.