Would a star undergoing neutron generation from - and + fusion actually show a drop in gravitational pull?

Question

quoting Morningstar;

"Keep in mind a neutron is not a bound system of an electron and a proton, though leading physicist Rutherford once thought so. It is a separate particle, though it can be formed by the merger of an electron and a proton.

....extra energy is needed to form the additional mass of the neutron. That's why protons and electrons don't merge under normal circumstances. ....it is the gravitational energy that supplies the extra energy. By adopting the form of neutrons, the matter in the star can become more compact, and thus have less gravitational potential energy. Although the mass-energy of the constituent particles is increased, the total energy is decreased." end quote.

Would then, a star undergoing such neutron generation show a perceptible drop in gravitational potential? You indicated, "By adopting the form of neutrons, the matter in the star can become more compact, and thus have less gravitational potential energy". Wouldn't the increase in mass, regardless of compacity, increase the gravitational potential, perhaps equaled by a decrease in the spectral energies? It sounds a bit like a self-defeating change if gravitational potential is used to create gravitational potential, though I suppose it may take 10 units of gravity to create a neutron which then generates only 1 additional unit of gravity... hmmm...

Answer 1

The increase in mass of the particles is very slight, less than 1%. On the other hand the size contraction is considerable. A neutron star must be at least 1.4 solar masses and a radius of about 12 km. A star of that mass would have radius on the order of 100,000 km. The progenitor star the neutron star came from could be even bigger, but some of the mass was probably blasted off into space by the supernova. Gravitational potential energy depends on both mass and position. Even if the mass were to increase slightly, the gravitational potential energy would decrease.



Note, you need to distinguish between gravitational potential energy and gravitational "pull". Two objects of the same mass will always have the same gravitational pull on objects at equal distance. However gravitational potential energy depends on the compactness of the object.



The total mass doesn't increase. That can't happen unless some material (or a lot of energy) falls onto the star. Energy is mass, mass is energy, and both produce gravity. The energy that went into creating the extra mass is no longer around as energy. The new matter is now producing gravity, but the old energy is no longer producing gravity. I also said the total energy decreases. That actually can't happen instantly either. Energy can't be destroyed. As the star contracts to become a neutron star, it would have to heat up, or perhaps the energy released contributes to the launching of the outer layers of the star as a supernova.



If it goes into the form of heat, that energy still resides in the neutron star, and energy is mass, so that also contributes to the gravitational field. The neutron star would have exactly the same gravitational pull at a fixed distance as the same quantity of matter arranged as a star, though its surface gravity is higher because its surface is at a closer distance to its center, and its gravitational potential energy is higher because it is more compact. As the neutron star continues to radiate thermal energy into space, it will lose mass because it is losing that energy. Normally, such energy is a small fraction of the total mass, but in the case of a neutron star, it might be significant. Since the upper range of neutron star masses approaches the lower range of black hole masses, the magnitude of the gravitational potential energy is of similar order of magnitude to the rest mass energy.

Answer 2

A star's gravity depends on his mass.



It slowly declines due to 2 reasons.



1) its solar wind carries of particles into interstellar space - chiefly electrons and protons.

2) matter is converted to energy in its core by fusion (of H to He)



A star is always in a state of equilibrium between the outward pressure of the fusion reaction ..

and ..

the inward pressure of its gravity.



the compactness or otherwise of the star does not change its gravity.

T

Answer 3

St. Joseph's study midsection may be variety sufficient to furnish you particular rules to income physics of our Universe. The consistent velocity of EMR in Our Universe is 3 hundred million meters in line with 2d. All regulations and theories would desire to be in line with this reality. with a view to income typical Physics at velocity 'c', then you certainly would desire to apply arithmetic (arithmetic and Geometry) and the regulations of refraction, and the regulations of total inner refraction in loose area. (evaluate to a Mirage on the earth.) as quickly as arithmetic defines a particle, which contains a Dalton Atom, then you certainly would prepare physics to it. potential exists in packets referred to as photons of Electromagnetic Radiations (EMR). those encompass a shell of forces forming a sphere such that the forces radiates radially interior the Z-axis like spicules of a hedgehog, an electric contemporary spirals interior the X-axis, and the magnetic rigidity will become the Y-axis like a propeller, petals out, and completes the sector. The significant element has place, yet no length in our Universe, defined on the cost of sunshine. you comprehend now that element does not have dimensions by skill of definition, so which you comprehend 2 factors can occupy the comparable area. whilst 2 factors coincide, the flux of potential doubles. whilst an Avogardo variety of things coincide, the proton is formed. it relatively is the comparable substance that varieties the Pulsar or the Black hollow. as a result you initiate with EMR or mild, and you wind up interior the Black hollow, however the comparable potential flux defines the black hollow, so at no time are you able to separate one from the different.

Answer 4

all unproven ( and unprovable ) theory based on zero evidence