New Pulsar-Planet System!

In the latest issue of Science 8/26/11 there is a report by Bailes et
al
describing the discovery and properties of a new pulsar-planet
system,
the third so far.

Pulsar-planets were first discovered in 1992.

In 1989, in the International Journal of Theoretical Physics,
vol. 28, No. 12, pp. 1503-1532, it was definitively predicted
by a new paradigm called the self-similar cosmological paradigm
(now referred to as Discrete Scale Relativity) that planetary-mass
objects would be discovered orbiting stellar-mass ultracompact
objects.

Discrete Scale Relativity was the only theory to ever definitively
predict
systems like pulsar-planets, explain how they form, and explain
why they should not be unusually rare objects.

If you would like to read more about this definitive scientific
prediction
by Discrete Scale Relativity, see Selected Paper #4
at http://www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw , which was also published in
IJTP.

It will be most interesting to see the more detailed properties
of this system once further research is done on it, especially
with the new Russian Spektr-R radio wave satellite that can be
linked to Earth-based radio telescopes to give unprecedented
resolution of radio sources, like a pulsar-planet system.

Game On!
RLO
Fractal Cosmology

Why do you assume that Pulsar-Planet systems would require a different
theory of formation compared to 'normal' stellar systems? The pulsar
state of the star is a result of its subsequent evolution, not its
formation. And a planet in the system would be largely unaffected by
this evolution (at least as far as its very existence is concerned).
And as for the theory of formation, I can't see anything in this
respect in the paper on your website at all.

Thomas

[[Mod. note --
Would preexisting planets necessarily surviva a supernova explosion
(to form the neutron star that later becomes a pulsar)? I think that
would depend on just how much mass was lost in the SN explosion.
-- jt]]

[[Mod. note --
Would preexisting planets necessarily surviva a supernova explosion
(to form the neutron star that later becomes a pulsar)? I think that
would depend on just how much mass was lost in the SN explosion.
-- jt]]

Well, yes, it would depend on much mass was lost, but it would also
depend on the mass of the planet. And if, in a general sense, you
include members of multiple star systems amongst the 'planets', then
these could be massive enough to survive the explosion at least in
some kind of remnant state.
In any case, it doesn't change anything about how the stellar system
formed in the first place. I mean it is hardly conceivable that any
object of this size would have formed as a result of the explosion.

Thomas

On Aug 31, 10:54*pm, Thomas Smid wrote:
[[Mod. note --
Would preexisting planets necessarily surviva a supernova explosion
(to form the neutron star that later becomes a pulsar)? *I think that
would depend on just how much mass was lost in the SN explosion.
-- jt]]

Well, yes, it would depend on much mass was lost, but it would also
depend on the mass of the planet. And if, in a general sense, you
include members of multiple star systems amongst the 'planets', then
these could be massive enough to survive the explosion at least in
some kind of remnant state.
In any case, it doesn't change anything about how the stellar system
formed in the first place. I mean it is hardly conceivable that any
object of this size would have formed as a result of the explosion.

Thomas

Other considerations which would determine whether a system becomes
unbound would be the systems ellipticity (although, I think, due to
tidal interactions a gas planets orbit would be circularized) and
whether or not the supernova was asymmetric or not - asymmetric kicks
can increase total allowable mass loss that results in disruption.
Disruption is also highly dependant on the distance of the objects
from each other. But, I would say this case is pretty unlikely - but
completely possible!

M.