February 9, 2017

Modeling and gravitational potential tapering? Angular inertia for Oort cloud?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , , , — zankaon @ 2:43 pm

Might gravitational potential, instead of inversely dropping off, have a different (exponential like?) tapering off? Differing, electric field, and also radioactivity, appears to suddenly drop off? Thus is there precedence for differences in decreasing field strength, and decrease in other phenomena?

Might such rendering be consistent with the continued apparent gravitational binding of Proxima centauri in it’s triple star system, even though seeming through calculations, being too far away from other 2 stars? Likewise is gravitational potential seemingly too weak, via calculations, to keep our moon in orbit? Hence might gravitational potential have a different gradual tapering off, not reflected in our calculations or modeling?

Thus rather than inversely dropping off, might there seem to be tappering of such potential far out; for example the Oort cloud, and Proxima centauri with a period of ~500,000 years, consistent with ~15,000 AU distance to alpha centauri; all part of a triple system. And perhaps even further outward – a neutrino belt?

Might more accurate modeling of such potential involve expansion as a series, with just inverse fall off as the zero term? Again tailoring such expansion series to suit any empirical findings, such as above?

Alternatively, rather than assumed tapering of gravitational potential, might angular momentum transfer alone account for ongoing migration, as well as circular orbiting, of KBO objects as part of Oort cloud? Likewise for far out neutrino belt? 

Thus is outer extent of stellar systems, and of our solar system, defined by angular inertia i.e. from angular momentum transfer in a flat 3-space, and not from gravitation? Thus no neccessity for tappering of gravitational potential model?

Is Proxima centauri’s distant from it’s binary companions at approximately that of Oort cloud? Based on above, it would seem closer in when compared to Oort cloud estimates. Yet might there be the possibility of a larger mass nearer to Oort cloud distance?

The Oort cloud is assumed to be comprised of just cometary mass scale. Since gravitational potential and curvature at such distant would not seem defined; hence could one have an undetected gas giant (historically related to Uranus’ tilted axis?) at such distance, and even a red dwarf, say .08 solar mass; neither one significantly affecting the rest of our stellar system? Or might long period comets we detect, be the result of (and consistent with) destabilzation by a gas giant or red dwarf nearer to Oort cloud?

A red dwarf mass could be infrared detected, including infrared spectroscopy. An invisible gas giant might only be detected by occultation of a background star(s).


October 16, 2016

Supernova – fission explosion? A precursor neutron star?


Cassiopeia A        NASA / JPL/ Caltech

Might one consider any SN1987 precursor star as a predominantly fusion star, as a source of energy; wherein one has gravitational collapse to a critical mass density, and then fission process commencing and predominating? Higher mass element nucleosynthesis would require free neutrons; thus wouldn’t nuclei fission be required?

If there is no detectable precursor star, might this be consistent with just a solo neutron star acquiring additional mass, or internal dynamics leading to run away explosive fission process i.e. supernova? Perhaps an internal/external circulating plasma in magnetic field of such neutron star, and redistribution of energy (magnetic reconnect – entanglement ?), leading to instabilities, such as localized change in neutron density?

What might be consistent with a supernova precursor being a neutron star? Since the supernova database continues to get bigger (including association with most long duration GRB), might one eventually match it to x-ray binary database (Chandra) in order to notice overlap of any SN with planar patch for x-ray binary? Then, if practical, see if a binary star is still there. If present, then might SN have originated from secondary compact object of x-ray binary?

Could one then consider the odds of any such alleged association, by comparing respective x-ray binary and gamma ray burst databases for association; such latter comparison, currently null?

Might another approach to any supernova remnant SNR, be to look for any motion of luminous star very near to SN1987 co-ordinates; within 1/2 arcsecond? That is, SN are anisotropic, as revealed by their effective absence in globular clusters. Therefore would any stellar motion  be evidence of a precursor binary? Also utilize infrared spectroscopy, looking for any remnant object, as elaborated on, below?

Shock waves expanding at 10s of thausands km/sec; whereas stellar natal kick might be at just ~1000 km/sec.? For the latter velocity of any possible surviving star of 1987 SN possible binary, for over 30 years, at a distance of ~165,0oo lyrs, what would be the angular displacement; discernable?

As critical mass density (sufficient for sustained chain reaction)  is reached, might one also have an energy density associated with eventual red dwarf formation? Perhaps the latter not just a remnant, but consistent with a fission process, contributing additionally (or solely) to what we detect as a supernova explosion?

Stars contain an abundance of iron (as per spectroscopy), not unlike earth and stellar nebula. If cosmic rays are predominantly iron nuclei, them might this also be consistent with a supernova fission process, including (mainly?) iron? But where is iron in a SN explosion? One has evidence of nickel and cobalt; both next (in atomic number and weight) to iron in Periodic Table. Are iron nuclei being utilized and consumed as a fissionable fuel in such SN explosion and element synthesis?

Might such considered fission process (perhaps iron doped with .1% uranium?), trigger off a supernova explosion, rather than just being an accompanying process? Might additional energy released be mainly massive neutrinos? In terms of energetics, is most of energy released in supernova explosion from neutrinos? Does fission process generate more neutrinos, as well as heat, than fusion?

Is the energy scale for SN limited to just 2 fermion generations (i.e muons) or might one have higher energy levels associated with fermion mass spectrum? What energy (mass density) scale is associated with (if) neutrino trapping; approximately same as for neutron (nucleon) degeneracy? But less than short duration GRB energy scale?

If higher energy scale, as for fermion mass spectrum, then one would seem to have left over higher generation massive neutrinos. Assuming no decay nor annihilation, and comparatively limited nucleon absorption, might our galaxy (including dark matter halo?), Large Magellanic Cloud, and solar system’s neutrino belt, contain a smaller fractional number of such more massive neutrinos, in addition to electron neutrinos?

Might a supernova explosion description be more than just release of gravitational potential energy, and more than just a bounce off an energy (i.e. mass density) nucleon (?) surface (simulations not consistent with such bounce?); and more than just a fusion process, since fuel has been markedly reduced? Instead might such explosion represent a qualitative and quantitative shift to a predominant fission process, with also perhaps a remnant, suggestive of such switch?

What is the most likely outcome of a supernova – no remnant? Might any database of supernova remnants (SNR) contain a compact object; a significant portion of original massive star? Would a pulsar be part of any such SNR database? Might likelihood of compact object be mass (10-15 solar mass?) dependent? What percentage of neutron stars are pulsars? If there were a supernova remnant, might it be of a lesser mass, such as red dwarf mass?

Or if a neutron star were a SN1987 remnant, then wouldn’t there be central x-ray detection, from strong magnetic field, near infall to magnetic pole? Might one have both a SN precursor neutron star, and also a somewhat lesser mass NS? But would there be sufficient fuel for SN in such scenario?

Could a supernova explosion sometimes leave behind a red dwarf remnant (i.e. SNR) fission star (such as .04 of 4 solar mass precursor), usually detectable only in infrared? Would infrared spectroscopy enable detection of such an object?

For example, might infrared spectroscopy distinguish between heat of expanding gas shell and an interior remnant source? Even if the site of SN1987 is obscured by gas clouds, inter-stellar debris etc., still might infrared spectroscopy reveal an object at SN1987 co-ordinates? Whereas gas clouds, and other diffuse infrared sources, might just reveal a slight non-specific pattern.

Thus would any such infrared spectroscopy detection (and thus revealed object?) seem consistent with the significance of a fission process in initiation of explosiveness of supernova phenomena?

Periodic Table

Chandra images

Theory of core-collapse of supernovae


July 8, 2016

Calculations and gravitational potential tapering – a problem? Angular inertia? Motion for our Sun, as part of a binary system? Parallax resolution?

Might gravitational potential, instead of inversely droping off linearly, perhaps have a different (exponential like?) tapering? Differently, does the electric field, and also radioactivity, have a sudden drop off? Thus is there perhaps precedence for differences in field strength, and decreases in other phenomenon?

Might such conjecture be consistent with any apparent gravitational binding of Proxima centauri in it’s triple star system, even though seeming, through calculations, being too far from other 2 stars? Likewise is gravitational potential seemingly too weak, via calculations, to keep our moon in orbit? Hence might our gravitational potential have a different gradual tapering, not reflected in our calculations or modeling?

Alternatively, rather than assumed tapering of gravitational potential, might angular momentum transfer alone account for ongoing migration of KBO objects, as part of circular orbiting Oort cloud? Or might just a weak gravitational description, together with angular momentum transfer, account for orbiting of Oort cloud objects?

Might such constant speed circular orbiting ( i.e. no central force, and hence no Kepler Laws) be described as angular inertia? Thus is outer extent of our solar system defined by such angular inertia in a flat 3-space, and not by gravitation; consistent with calculations? Thus no neccessity for tapering of gravitational potential model?

Also might any sister red dwarf star actually still be in nearly circular orbit with our sun, if still far out in weak tapering gravitational potential? If so, then a center of mass for such binary stellar system would be much closer to our sun. Hence might there be an additional detectable motion for our sun, if part of such binary system? Might parallax of a masked sun, giving apparent shifting position of background stars, actually be a composite of earth’s and sun’s respective orbit/motion?

For example, one could compare parallax results for vernal and autumnal equinoxes, which should be periodic. If not, then consistent with such additional parallax being due to a binary stellar companion.

Might one re-measure and reconsider Doppler spectroscopy radial velocity line of sight technique to detect any inapparent periodic frequency shifting  (of absorption lines) due to sun’s position at line of sight opposite sides of any motion? So rather than attributing such radial motion solely to our gas giant (~ 1/1000 of solar mass), might one have a larger component contribution from such considered center of mass for a binary stellar system?

For hot Jupiter’s, periodicity is over days. For our sun, might it be for over years, consistent with period of red dwarf companion?

Since approximately 1000 Jupiter masses equal mass of sun; thus for red dwarf of .04 solar mass, then ~40 Jupiter masses. Where would the center of gravity be, for such binary system? And what would motion for our sun look like, for such binary system? One could seemingly work both ways, deriving mass of system from doppler radial velocity effect; or conversely.

For movement of Sun, because of a binary companion for such system, one might consider a simplified circular motion; then would entire system (planets, asteroid belt, Kuiper belt, any neutrino belt, Oort cloud) all shift over a period of years (?), for inclusion of a red dwarf binary companion with period of years? That is, most of mass (95% for our ex.) is associated with our sun; hence such motion of sun would have associated changing center of mass.

Would rate of parallax changing give period of such primary stellar motion? Also no adjustments to gravitational description for various objects’ locations, for system moving as a whole, for massive sun’s location. So no relative change for inside overall system; but for comparison to outside environment, sun’s change in location would have effect of gradual change in curvature. Not unlike a rogue black hole binary moving into our system?

Doppler spectroscopy. incorrect drawing at beginning of link? CM should move?

December 8, 2015

Red dwarf – fission star?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , , — zankaon @ 1:10 pm

Globular clusters form early (stellar age of ~12 byrs ?). Do such globular clusters have a strong infrared signature? If not, then consistent with lack of early red dwarf formation? Also if nearby Proxima centauri is a red dwarf, then such triplet system would not seem that old; ~4Byrs? Hence might red dwarfs form at stage of maximum star formation, at redshift z~2-3? But then not enough time to use up all of hydrogen fuel, if fusion to fission (i.e non-helium synthesis) star scenario is entertained.

Might infrared spectroscopy of red dwarf model – Proxima centari be useful? However do cooler stars, such as spectral class M infrared dwarfs, have greater number of spectral lines, relating to cooler surface temperature, as compared to G spectral class of our Sun?

Might red dwarfs initially form as fission (i.e. non-fusion) stars, wherein a physical phase change, associated with increased mass density and/or pressure increase, gives a built in solid-like, or liquid interior phase change? For example Proxima centari has mass density ~40x that of our Sun, with ~.12 of solar mass and ~1/7 of solar diameter. Mean density increases for stars of decreasing mass, as for lower right on H-R diagram for main sequence stars. Also might some x-ray binares have a red dwarf as a companion, dumping gas onto such compact; hence consistent with fluid exterior for such red dwarf. However one could still have a physical phase change for interior; hence consistent with infrared signature.

So is Proxima centari a good nearby optical model for a red dwarf; the latter most typical for stars? And is such strong infrared signature and high mass density suggestive of internal alternative nuclear chemistry interactions, with a possible physical phase change, with no helium synthesis; rather a fission star, especially for a solid-like interior?

For x-ray binary, might one have accreting mass, both gaseous and even liquid outer core, being drawn off from red dwarf toward compact object (ss433 x-ray binary? )? Might one have residual solid core fission for such red dwarf? Might it constitute a residual red dwarf for eclipsing x-ray binary? Has it’s x-ray profile (from core?) been largely unaffected?

If all red dwarfs are fission stars, then signifcant gamma rays and x-rays? So in addition to difference in infrared signature for fission vs fusion (i.e. sun like) stars, might there also be a difference in x-ray signature, related to gamma rays for fission red dwarf stars? Also if gamma ray pulsars have an infrared signature, might not only the interior processes be similar to a red dwarf, but also might they be red dwarfs?

Might red dwarf star have a rotating solid core? A fission core, detectable in infrared, that lasts essentially indefinitely? For example, might IR detect fission core for ss433 companion of x-ray binary?

If red dwarfs (with small envelope?) have a solid fission core; then doesn’t one have an expanded stellar definition? Might natural plutonium then be widespread, since originally from such fission core stars? Or is sufficient plutonium burned in such ‘breeder’ fission core stars? For fission star, then element synthesis would not stop with stability of iron nucleus.

Might our whole understanding of what delimits (defines) a star need reassesment? For example, Proxima centauri has a very low mass of .12 solar mass, low volume, and hence high mass density. Also a low surface temperature. So if Proxima has a significant infrared signature, suggesting a non-fusion star, and perhaps solid core, then low mass, volume, and low temperature might not seem so significant for star-dom status. But perhaps mass density, and pressure (for small volume?) relate to a so-called fission star status. Also can even a less massive Brown dwarf, since having an infrared signature similar to red dwarfs, be classified as a very low mass fission star? So is what’s going on in the interior that which defines a star?

Might equation of state (mass density and pressure) be irrelevant? That is, for iron core with 0.1 % uranium, would this be sufficient to account for observed infrared signature of a red dwarf?

Fusion, most efficient for a fluid core; and fission most suitable for rotating solidified stellar core? Can one have fission for just a liquid core; perhaps for brown dwarf? Might one even have a heterogeneous core, with liquid ‘lakes’ and some fusion, together with surrounding solid state fission core, generating copious heat, sufficient to maintain such ‘lakes’? But would there be sufficient fuel for such fusion ‘lake’ reactors? In principle, might neutrino flux distinguish a fusion reactor from fission reactor core, since associated more so with latter?

Might brown dwarfs be fission core reactor stars with (or without?) some ‘lakes’? How does infrared image of brown dwarf compare to that of red dwarf, and to that of less massive Jupiter? Might such brown dwarf appear in infrared more like a red dwarf; hence consistent with fission core?

If most stars are red dwarfs, then do most stars have a fission core? Thus on H-R diagram, lower right would constitute majority of stars – red dwarfs? And middle main sequence constituting a lesser number of fusion stars, like our sun. On such diagram does one measure bolometric luminosity; but not inclusive of infrared, wherein most of energy is radiated for a red dwarf?

Are any hot jupiters associated with a red dwarf, based on infrared signal? How close to red dwarf of .12 solar mass, would a hot Jupiter’s orbit be; inside corona (flares for Proxima centauri, indicative of energy re-distribution in magnetic field via magnetic reconnect)?

Hertzsprung-Russell diagram

If fusion stars, fission stars, brown dwarf stars (?), and Jupiter, all have a magnetic field, then might all have at least a circulating liquid/solid core?  also see zankaon web site.   TMM

‘Lucy in the sky’ with plutonium ….. ?

Blog at