How about an Electroweak star?

Andrew Usher wrote:
On Jan 25, 3:24 am, " wrote:

What will they look like toward the end of their lives? At some
point the "apple-sized region" will get too small or too cold to
sustain "electroweak burning", but the object could then be too small
to remain a neutron star. Will it "reinflate" to a white dwarf of some
sort?

Can someone tell me what the heck 'electroweak burning' is? I haven't
seen a good explanation here.

Andrew Usher

Word Salad, sprinkled with kooked opinions.

On 23 Jan, 09:41, Yousuf Khan wrote:
This is presumably one stage higher than a black hole, but two stages
lower than a neutron star, and one stage lower than a quark star. I'm
not sure, it's not mentioned in the article if it's lower or higher than
a quark star.

Also not mentioned in the article is what happens to this star after
about 10 million years, when the electroweak burning phase finishes?
Does it turn into a black hole, or does it turn into a neutron star or
quark star?

And how does a quark turn into a lepton? Is that in the Standard Model?
Or is this coming from an interpretation of one of the Superstring or
some other theories? The only thing I know about the Weak force is how
it causes atomic fission.

* * * * Yousuf Khan

***
SPACE.com -- New Type of Exotic Star Proposed
"An electroweak star could come into being toward the end of a massive
star's life, after nuclear fusion has stopped in its core, but before
the star collapses into a black hole, the researchers found.

At this point, the temperature and density inside a star could be so
high, subatomic particles called quarks (which are the building blocks
of protons and neutrons) could be converted into lighter particles
called leptons, which include electrons and neutrinos.

"In this process, which we call electroweak burning, huge amounts of
energy can be released," the researchers wrote in the scientific paper.

Unfortunately for observers, much of that energy would be in the form of
neutrinos, which are very light neutral particles that can pass through
ordinary matter without interacting, making them very difficult to detect.."http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/exotic-star-type-proposed-10012...

Kahn Last phase for a Sun like star is a White Dwarf. It has about
the size of Earth,but now has a mass density of 100,000 times greater
than it was Sun size. I read it can shine for a trillion years ???
TreBert

bert wrote:
Kahn Last phase for a Sun like star is a White Dwarf. It has about
the size of Earth,but now has a mass density of 100,000 times greater
than it was Sun size. I read it can shine for a trillion years ???
TreBert

A white dwarf is basically just radiating leftover heat away, it's not
producing any new energy like with nuclear fusion; that's how it keeps
"shining". It's now a battery rather than a generator. As the degenerate
matter inside it enters into lower energy states, they radiate the
energy away in the form of photons. It can take trillions of years for
all of the degenerate matter from the deep interior of the white dwarf
all of the way upto the surface to all enter their lowest energy states.

The same goes for neutron stars and quark stars. As all of that type of
degenerate matter shift around inside it, until they all eventually
enter their lowest energy states, it can take trillions of years.

In the case of this electroweak star, they are suggesting that the
conversion of quarks into leptons is what carries away their energy,
rather than through photons. They suggest that this is a phase that can
last only 10 million years before it stops. I assume that means only a
small percentage of quarks can be converted into leptons, probably only
the stuff at the core which is at greatest pressure. When all of this is
finished, I presume that the star is now much lighter as the leptons
carry away not only energy but also mass. At that point the star
probably just becomes a normal neutron or quark star.

Yousuf Khan

On Jan 23, 8:41*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
This is presumably one stage higher than a black hole, but two stages
lower than a neutron star, and one stage lower than a quark star. I'm
not sure, it's not mentioned in the article if it's lower or higher than
a quark star.

Also not mentioned in the article is what happens to this star after
about 10 million years, when the electroweak burning phase finishes?
Does it turn into a black hole, or does it turn into a neutron star or
quark star?

And how does a quark turn into a lepton? Is that in the Standard Model?

It comes from one of several *extensions* to the Standard Model.
Examples include the now defunct SU(5) supergroup, technicolor, and
some supersymmetry variants.

Or is this coming from an interpretation of one of the Superstring or
some other theories? The only thing I know about the Weak force is how
it causes atomic fission.

* * * * Yousuf Khan

***
SPACE.com -- New Type of Exotic Star Proposed
"An electroweak star could come into being toward the end of a massive
star's life, after nuclear fusion has stopped in its core, but before
the star collapses into a black hole, the researchers found.

At this point, the temperature and density inside a star could be so
high, subatomic particles called quarks (which are the building blocks
of protons and neutrons) could be converted into lighter particles
called leptons, which include electrons and neutrinos.

"In this process, which we call electroweak burning, huge amounts of
energy can be released," the researchers wrote in the scientific paper.

Unfortunately for observers, much of that energy would be in the form of
neutrinos, which are very light neutral particles that can pass through
ordinary matter without interacting, making them very difficult to detect.."http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/exotic-star-type-proposed-10012...

On Jan 27, 11:53*am, PD wrote:

And how does a quark turn into a lepton? Is that in the Standard Model?

It comes from one of several *extensions* to the Standard Model.
Examples include the now defunct SU(5) supergroup, technicolor, and
some supersymmetry variants.

Please read the preceding posts. It _is_ Standard Model, albeit many
people (including me, until now) have never heard of it.

Andrew Usher

Andrew Usher wrote:
On Jan 27, 11:53 am, PD wrote:

And how does a quark turn into a lepton? Is that in the Standard Model?
It comes from one of several *extensions* to the Standard Model.
Examples include the now defunct SU(5) supergroup, technicolor, and
some supersymmetry variants.

Please read the preceding posts. It _is_ Standard Model, albeit many
people (including me, until now) have never heard of it.

Andrew Usher

It seems the majority of us in this newsgroup have a conventional
understanding of nuclear physics circa the 1950's, but there are groups
of scientists who have a deeper understanding about it than us. Perhaps
equipped with 1970's knowledge.

It may not be as profound a divide as we see between the people equipped
with Newtonian knowledge, trying to come to terms with Einstein.
However, it shows us how difficult it is for the Newtonians to upgrade
from the 17th century to the early 20th century.

Yousuf Khan

"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
...
Andrew Usher wrote:
On Jan 27, 11:53 am, PD wrote:

And how does a quark turn into a lepton? Is that in the Standard Model?
It comes from one of several *extensions* to the Standard Model.
Examples include the now defunct SU(5) supergroup, technicolor, and
some supersymmetry variants.

Please read the preceding posts. It _is_ Standard Model, albeit many
people (including me, until now) have never heard of it.

Andrew Usher

It seems the majority of us in this newsgroup have a conventional
understanding of nuclear physics circa the 1950's, but there are groups of
scientists who have a deeper understanding about it than us. Perhaps
equipped with 1970's knowledge.

It may not be as profound a divide as we see between the people equipped
with Newtonian knowledge, trying to come to terms with Einstein. However,
it shows us how difficult it is for the Newtonians to upgrade from the
17th century to the early 20th century.

Yousuf Khan

Should a sane mathematician come to terms with an incompetent egomaniac?
Oh wait... a bigot like you is not qualified to answer that.
Take your head out of your arse and learn something, grinagog:
http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co...r_children.htm

On Jan 28, 9:24*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:

It seems the majority of us in this newsgroup have a conventional
understanding of nuclear physics circa the 1950's, but there are groups
of scientists who have a deeper understanding about it than us. Perhaps
equipped with 1970's knowledge.

Yeah, it's strange that this is just being investigated now.

I wonder if we'll ever detect one of these stars. The trouble is, the
energy of electroweak burning will be virtually all emitted as
neutrinos, and thus undetectable. The photon luminosity should be
hardly greater than a normal neutron star. So I guess the sign of an
electroweak star will be an object that clearly can't be a black hole
but is above the normal neutron-star limit, which is probably around
2.2 Msun.

Andrew Usher