!******************
1/10/19:
1/9/19:
go thru whole sequence w diagram subsets:
will publish "in progress" snapshots
***********************!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diagram 1 shows the first observations of radio pulsars, of which the Crab is
one of the best examples.
The diagram shows that when the Crab was first observed in radio in 1968,
it contained a fast pulsar (FP) (rotating about 33 times per second),
immersed in a SuperNova Remnant(s) (SNR).
FP(MAX) is the initial spin rate when this entity appeared
which was about 58 rotations per second, in 1054 AD.
Of course, the radio pulsar was not seen, in 1054 AD,
when the SNR was seen visually, but the "58" has been calculated
based on the radio pulsar's current spin-down rate.
Currently the FP is slowing down:
the term, "FP(-)", indicates a FP that is rotating slower with time.
This diagram is intended to show what is actually observed, as opposed
to any theory about how it came into existence.
In truth we only observe FP(-) and SP(-) (Slow Pulsar slowing down),
however we can confidently "project" that sometime before the FP(-)
stage, there was an origin with FP(MAX), which has since been
slowing down.
Similarly, we can confidently "project" that the SP will continue to
slow down until it is simply a NS(0) that is a neutron star that
is no longer visible because its rotation is too slow to be
observed, so we say it is effectively zero.
Finally, long after the slow down phase, the NS is simply a "NS",
which is traveling through space with no discernable rotation
characteristics.
Somewhere between FP(MAX)+SNR and FP(-), the SNR have dissipated,
and therefore we only observe a lone pulsar spinning down.
In summary, Diagram 1 shows what is actually observed by radio telescopes
and what can be inferred from those observations as to the "origin" and
final "destination" of a pulsar that "originates" (is first seen) as
a FP(AX) and finally ends up as a NP.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
process (6)
Diagram 1
+-------------+
| FP(MAX)+SNR |
+-------------+
|
V
+-------+
| FP(-) |
+-------+
|
V
+-------+
| SP(-) |
+-------+
|
V
+-------+
| NS(0) |
+-------+
|
V
+---+
| NS|
+---+
Diagram 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diagram 2 introduces "theory". i.e. 2 boxes have been added which represent
the original theory that was developed about systems like the Crab pulsar
and Nebula.
The theory persists to this day, however, we shall prove that it must be replaced
with a new theory that explains features of pulsars that the current theory
cannot explain.
The current theory states that:
1. A Giant Star (GS) evolves to a point where it spotaneously explodes in
a SuperNova Event (SNE) and simultaneously implodes thereby creating
a brand new FP, which is a fast spinning NS.
This is represented by the boxes: GS->(SNE>>FP), where "SNE>>FP" represents
the SNE explosion "creating the FP as a result of the equal and opposite
implosion.
2. The theory then states that this event shows itself after the explosion
as a FP initially spinning at its MAX rate, and the SuperNova Remnants
are the remains of the exploded part of the GS.
The significance of the placement of objects on the diagram will become apparent
as we proceed. The "vertical" axis may be regarded as the hottest and fastest
spinning objects at the top, and the slowest and coolest objects at the bottom.
i.e. an object moving upwards in the diagram is heating up, and an object
moving down in the diagram is cooling down.
So, what we see here on the right is a GS "heating up" and finally reaching
its maximum heat, at which point it explodes in a SNE.
Then we can view the horizontal arrow as pointing from the event to the
state of the system immediately after the event.
The right hand column is "theoretical", and the left column is "observed".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
process (6)
Diagram 2
+-------------+ +---------+
| FP(MAX)+SNR |<----| SNE>>FP |
+-------------+ +---------+
| ^
V |
+-------+ +-----+
| FP(-) | | GS |
+-------+ +-----+
|
V
+-------+
| SP(-) |
+-------+
|
V
+-------+
| NS(0) |
+-------+
|
V
+---+
| NS|
+---+
Diagram 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diagram 3 introduces the observations from X-ray astronomy,
of the binary system, Cen X-3 that was first discovered in 1971,
based on data collected from the Uhuru Satellite.
That discovery showed a 4.8 sec pulsar rotation in a close binary
eclipsing system, with a SuperGiant companion, with a 2.1 day orbital period.
The Cen X-3 pulsar is "spinning up" as was found in 1971, and the spin-up
continues through the present. In the last 45 years the spin rate has
increased from 4.84 sec to 4.82 seconds, or about 1/3 of 1%.
In this discussion, because Cen X-3 is one of the fastest X-ray pulsars,
with a GS companion, we will designate it as a "FP(+)" pulsar, i.e.
a fast pulsar that is spinning up.
Because the pulsar cannot escape from the its close binary orbits, and the
fact, that the orbit is shrinking because of the interaction with the
GS atmosphere, we can safely project that the pulsar will continue to
spin up and simultaneously burrow deeper into the atmosphere of the GS companion.
In addition, in the decades following 1971, a class of Be X-ray binaries have
been discovered, with dozens of examples, that are very slow pulsars in the
range of 10 sec per rotation to 2000 sec per rotation. These binaries are,
in general, highly elliptical however, they do have "close encounters" at the
perihelion of each orbit, where they interact with their companion GS. This
interaction causes the pulsar to spin up, and causes the orbit to shrink
a bit during each cycle.
For these spinning-up X-ray pulsars, we will use the term "SP(+)" to indicate
that they are "Slow Pulsars" that are spinning up. Therefore on the diagram
below we regard Cen X-3 as a FP(+), and a Be X-ray binary as a SP(+).
Therefore, the middle 2 boxes in Diagram 3 are direct observations, while the
top and bottom boxes are confidently "projected observations".
For the bottom box, we assume that all the SPs originally had even more
eccentric orbits, and spin rates, so slow as to be undetectable, and
most likely originally zero, as indicated by NS(0).
Note: all the bottom 3 boxes are a pulsar PLUS a GS, i.e. "FP(+)+GS",
"SP(+)+GS", and "NS(0)+GS", which indicates they are binary systems,
that are progressing up the chart by spinning up and having their
orbit shrink with ongoing interactions between the NS/pulsar and the GS.
The top box is also an "inferred observation", namely that at some point
the FP will destroy the GS in an explosion, that we designate as "FP>>GSE",
to indicate that the fast pulsar (FP) eventually causes the GS to destabilize,
and explode in a "GSE".
What we can actually confidentally project is that the FP will continue
to spin-up and burrow into the GS, and emit on the order of 10**39 erg/sec
in X-rays. As the FP burrows in, the X-rays will not be observable externally,
because they will be absorbed by the atmosphere of the star, and re-emitted
at lower wavelengths.
What we can also confidently say is that the GS with the embedded FP, will now
in turn, itself, emit 10**39 ergs/sec at lower wavelengths, generated by the
absorption of the X-rays, and the re-emissions at lower wavelenths.
(This will be discussed further in Diagram 4).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
process (6)
Diagram 3
+---------+
| FP>>GSE |
+---------+
^
|
+---------+
| FP(+)+GS|
+---------+
^
|
+---------+
| SP(+)+GS|
+---------+
^
|
+---------+
| NS(0)+GS|
+---------+
Diagram 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diagram 4, below, shows the theory, that this web site projects for the evolution
of the observed systems shown in Diagram 3.
We project that when the GS explodes in a GSE, that the result will be a fast pulsar,
FP(MAX), spinning at its maximum rate, immersed in a Giant Star Remnant (GSR).
Once the GS explodes, its remnant will be dispersed by the FP, using analogous
mechanisms to that of the Crab described in Diagrams 1 and 2.
It is possible that other fates, might befall the GS, such as it being "evaporated"
slowly, leaving a white dwarf and a FP in a close binary system, as is observed
in MilliSecond Pulsars (MSPs). However, that fate will not be discussed in this
summary and left for more detailed discussion on a separate web page.
This page is intended to show the main theory of Giant Stars and Pulsars, and the topics
on this page will be limited to the most likely and obvious theories that can be
directly supported by the evidence.
Suffice it to say, that Giant Stars (GSs), that emit 10**39 ergs/sec are generally
classified as SuperGiants (SGs), and are known to be subject to self-destruction
as in SN1987A.
In addition, the companion of Cen X-3 is a supergiant, so there is ample evidence
that we are in a domain where the supergiant stars are subject to explosions.
Diagram 4, subsequently shows, in the right hand column, that the FP will proceed
to blow the Giant Star Remmant away, and simply become a FP(-), that slows down
to become a SP(-), and finally becomes a non-observable isolated NS(0).
Note the remarkable similarity between the fate of the FP in diagrams 1,2, and 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
process (6)
Diagram 4
+---------+ +-------------+
| FP>>GSE |------>| FP(MAX)+GSR |
+---------+ +-------------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| FP(+)+GS| | FP(-) |
+---------+ +-------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| SP(+)+GS| | SP(-) |
+---------+ +-------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| NS(0)+GS| | NS(0) |
+---------+ +-------+
|
V
+---+
| NS|
+---+
Diagram 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diagram 5 combines Diagrams 2 and 4, side by side to show the similarities between
the X-ray and Radio theories described in those diagrams.
One interesting thing about this comparison is that the two theories are based on
two completely different sets of observations (the left colunm of both theories).
The X-ray observations predict the FP in the right column will spin down to the NS.
The radio observations actually show the same bottom 4 boxes as the X-ray prediction.
The argument made by this web site is that the forward in time X-ray predictions
result in exactly the same results
as the radio observations, which are used to make a backward in time prediction
as to the origin of the FP as being from a solitary GS explosion.
Therefore Diagram 5 shows a likely problem with the NS-Creation theory, because
if the X-ray theory is true, then there is no need for the radio theory.
What this boils down to is whether the top 2 boxes of the X-ray theory, namely
that a FP blowing up a GS produces the same result as observed in the SNR observations
of DIagram 1.
In other words, if we conclude that effectively, GSE==SNE, and GSR==SNR, then we are
left with 2 predictions of the exact same phenomenon, i.e. the SNE.
If we reach that conclusion the cause of the SNE reduces to a comparison between
the X-ray observations against the Radio theory. The observations must then prevail,
and the Radio theory, the NS-Creation theory must be rejected.
This discussion will be analyzed further on a separate web page.
We will now advance the analysis, beginning in Diagram 6, that explores the origin
of the NS(0) in the X-ray observations, which again has both a Radio theory (NS-Creation)
explanation and an X-ray observation explantion (which, as will become apparent below,
will be called the NS-Capture theory).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
process (6)
Diagram 5
<- X-ray observations and theory -> <- Radio observations and theory ->
^^^^^ ^^^^^
+---------+ +-------------+ +-------------+ +---------+
| FP>>GSE |------>| FP(MAX)+GSR | | FP(MAX)+SNR |<------| SNE>>FP |
+---------+ +-------------+ +-------------+ +---------+
^ | | ^
| V V |
+---------+ +-------+ +-------+ +-----+
| FP(+)+GS| | FP(-) | | FP(-) | | GS |
+---------+ +-------+ +-------+ +-----+
^ | |
| V V
+---------+ +-------+ +-------+
| SP(+)+GS| | SP(-) | | SP(-) |
+---------+ +-------+ +-------+
^ | |
| V V
+---------+ +-------+ +-------+
| NS(0)+GS| | NS(0) | | NS(0) |
+---------+ +-------+ +-------+
| |
V V
+---+ +---+
| NS| | NS|
+---+ +---+
Diagram 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on Diagram 5, we can see the observations lead us to 2 distinct ways
to create an isolated NS.
The x-ray observations start with a SP that spins up to become a FP.
In the top 2 boxes of the x-ray section, FP>>GSE ---> FP(MAX)+GSR, we may not
know exactly what happens, however, we can confidently predict that ultimately
the GS will be destroyed and we will end up with a FP that eventually slows
down to become an isolated NS.
Similarly, in the radia observations, we directly observe FP(-) and SP(-), and
therefore can confidently assume this process will also end up with an isolated NS.
Since the last 4 steps of both the x-ray process and the radio process are the
same we can combine the 2 processes in Diagram 5, by having a single box that
we can call: "FP(MAX)+(GSR|SNR)", which says a FP with MAX spin rate, plus
either a GSR or a SNR depending on which path preceded the new box.
In Diagram 6 we show the x-ray and radio processes overlapping.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
process (6)
Diagram 6
<---- Radio observations and theory ---->
^^^^^
<---- X-ray observations and theory ---->
^^^^^
+---------+ +-------------------+ +---------+
| FP>>GSE |------>| FP(MAX)+(GSR|SNR) |<------| SNE>>FP |
+---------+ +-------------------+ +---------+
^ | ^
| V |
+---------+ +-------+ +-----+
| FP(+)+GS| | FP(-) | | GS |
+---------+ +-------+ +-----+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| SP(+)+GS| | SP(-) |
+---------+ +-------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| NS(0)+GS| | NS(0) |
+---------+ +-------+
|
V
+---+
| NS|
+---+
Diagram 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Diagram 6 we see that NS-Creation theory (SNE>>FP), begins with a GS and ends with a NS.
We also see that in X-ray theory (NS-Capture), that we begin with a NS plus a GS and end
up with only a NS.
So, basically we have:
1. GS --> SNE>>FP --> NS (radio)
2. NS+GS --> FP>>GSE --> NS (x-ray)
How do we resolve these 2 processes? It seems unlikely that there are 2 ways to create a NS,
because a NS is a very massive and powerful object that has a rest state (NS) and a
super-high spin rate state (FP).
So, effectively we seem to have 2 ways to create a FP, which later slows down to be a NS.
It seems logical reduce 1 and 2 further to simply say:
1. GS --> NS (radio)
2. NS+GS --> NS (x-ray)
We know the x-ray process can only last about 1 million years, because the NS->FP process
ends up emitting 10**39 ergs/sec into the GS, which will totally destroy the GS in that time.
So, we need to ask: "Where did the NS in (2) come from?"
It must have arrived within the past 1 million years.
Therefore let assume that process 1 is accurate, and that the NS in (2) was created by a process (1).
What this means is that the NS+GS system, must have originally been a GS+GS system, where the
following took place:
3. GS+GS --> { (GS --> SNE>>FP --> NS) + GS } --> NS+GS
i.e. one of the GS's in GS+GS, experienced a SNE, which create a fast pulsar (FP), which then
spun down to become a NS, leaving NS+GS.
We show this process in more detail in Diagram 7, where we have expanded the process (3) above
to its full diagram and shown it as the precursor to diagram 6.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
process (6)
Diagram 7:
NS-Creation Theory (SNE>>FP)
+------------+ +----------------+ +---------+ +------------------+ +---------+
| GS+SNE>>FP |--->| GS+SNR+FP(MAX) | | FP>>GSE |------>| FP(MAX)+(GSR|SNR |<----| SNE>>FP |
+------------+ +----------------+ +---------+ +------------------+ +---------+
^ | ^ | ^
| V | V |
+-------+ +----------+ +---------+ +-------+ +-----+
| GS+GS | | GS+FP(-) | | FP(+)+GS| | FP(-) | | GS |
+-------+ +----------+ +---------+ +-------+ +-----+
| ^ |
V | V
+----------+ +---------+ +-------+
| GS+SP(-) | | SP(+)+GS| | SP(-) |
+----------+ +---------+ +-------+
| ^ |
V | V
+----------+ +---------+ +-------+
| GS+NS(0) |------->| NS(0)+GS| | NS(0) |
+----------+ +---------+ +-------+
|
V
+---+
| NS|
+---+
Diagram 7:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diagram 7 now provides us a model of how NS-Creation is used to explain both the x-ray and radio
observations of isolated (radio) and binary (x-ray) pulsars.
The essence of NS-Creation theory is that a SNE creates a FP.
If we look closely at Diagram 7, we can see some serious problems that NS-Creation introduces
in trying to explain the x-ray observations of column 3 and the readio observations of column 4.
The problems are the following:
1. Comparing column 2 and column 3, we see 2 direct contradictions:
row 2: both processes GS+FP(-) and GS+FP(+) must somehow both be true
row 3: both processes GS+SP(-) and GS+SP(+) must somehow both be true
In other words a NS in the presence of a GS must be able to
both spin-up (col 3) AND spin down (col 2).
We know a NS in the presence of a GS can spin up, as in col 3,
because that is seen in the x-ray observations of dozens of systems.
However, there are zero observations of a NS spinning down in the presence of a GS.
In addition, it is logical that we do not see such observations, because the GS and NS
interact through accretion, which is an observed physical process that spins up a NS.
Therefore, the logical conclusion is that column 2 does not happen, and must be rejected
as a possible origin of the NS at the bottom of col 3.
2. The other major problem: row 1, cols 3,4,5 was described in diagram 6, where NS-Creation
forces us into a situation where there must exist 2 ways to create a NS.
Since, we observe col 3, we must logically reject col 5 as a likely mechanism for creating
the FP observed in col 4.
This still leaves with the problem of where did the NS at the bottom of col 3 come from.
Let us remove cols 1,2,5 from Diagram 7, and use the remaining cols 3 and 4 as DIagram 8:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
process (6)
Diagram 8:
NS-Capture Theory (FP>>GSE)
+---------+ +-------------+
| FP>>GSE |--------->| FP(MAX)+GSR |
+---------+ +-------------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| FP(+)+GS| | FP(-) |
+---------+ +-------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| SP(+)+GS| | SP(-) |
+---------+ +-------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| NS(0)+GS| | NS(0) |
+---------+ +-------+
|
V
+---+
| NS|
+---+
Diagram 8:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diagram 9 shows the only way to resolve the origin of the NS in the NS+GS box:
i.e. it must have been captured by a GS. And it must have come from some place
other than the vicinicy of the GS. i.e. it must have been a random encounter
between a GS and a NS that was a binding collision
that resulted in a binary system: NS+GS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
process (6)
Diagram 9:
NS-Capture Theory (FP>>GSE)
+---------+ +-------------+
| FP>>GSE |--------->| FP(MAX)+GSR |
+---------+ +-------------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| FP(+)+GS| | FP(-) |
+---------+ +-------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| SP(+)+GS| | SP(-) |
+---------+ +-------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| NS(0)+GS| | NS(0) |
+---------+ +-------+
^ ^ |
| | V
+---+ +---+ +---+
| NS| | GS| | NS|
+---+ +---+ +---+
Diagram 9:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now that we have eliminated NS-Creation as a possible source of the NS's found
in pulsar observations, we may finally equate:
GSE == SNE
GSR == SNR
which we show in diagram 10:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
process (6)
Diagram 10:
NS-Capture Theory (FP>>GSE)
+---------+ +-------------+
| FP>>SNE |--------->| FP(MAX)+SNR |
+---------+ +-------------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| FP(+)+GS| | FP(-) |
+---------+ +-------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| SP(+)+GS| | SP(-) |
+---------+ +-------+
^ |
| V
+---------+ +-------+
| NS(0)+GS| | NS(0) |
+---------+ +-------+
^ ^ |
| | V
+---+ +---+ +---+
| NS| | GS| | NS|
+---+ +---+ +---+
Diagram 10:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At this point we have a clear unambiguous model of SuperNova Explosions,
radio pulsars (FP(-)) and x-ray pulsars (SP(+)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
12345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
