Compressed Matter In Normal Space

I would of thought that the object would "retain" its properties due to its own internal gravitational forces. I guess it depends on how much external compression was involved. A bit like scrunching up a piece of paper, do it with moderate force and it will attempt to straighten out, use lots of force and it will stay a ball.

But hey I'm only a busted arse radio mechanic what would I know?

Thats about my level of understandings as well.

I have been thinking that being its compressed at the atomic and subatomic levels by gravity induced forces that once its taken away from that primary source of massive gravitational compression (the primary compressed mass singularity) that the atomic forces would override the gravitational effects being that they are magnitudes lower in energy.

That is assuming the piece of compressed matter itself is not too great and its own gravitational forces start pulling in everything around it again.

It's a good question. I wonder what happens to a collapsed star after everything is said and done. Does something the size of a golf ball, with incredible density, just float around in space?

Hopefully Jorrie will come along and help us out.

Since nobody seems to understand the nature of gravity, nobody can know for sure what happens in a case like this...There does seem to be quite a large number of these collapsed heavenly bodies...If we could determine why they don't all become black holes, then we might determine the nature of gravity...I suspect it has something to do with the material composition, less dense interior covered in more dense outer shell, dense interior, less dense layer, extremely dense outermost layer..something like that...perhaps some atoms collapse more easily than others because of their structure....Everything does seem to be made out of a whole lot of nothing, but strange unexplained forces...

Nice description, Solar.

Yes, we do not understand what is going on with gravity at the atomic level. I recall that large stars running out of fuel is theorized (through models) to start collapsing from the inside. Some make dwarf stars, some neutron stars and some black holes, depending on mass, we think.

And Magnatar's..

or a pulsar...

It depends how much it's compressed. In principle, any mass can be compressed to the point where its radius is less than its Schwarzchild radius. This is the radius at which its escape velocity = velocity of light, and it becomes a black hole.

The density at this point varies inversely as mass². Eg for the Sun, mass 2*10³⁰ kg, the Schwarzchild radius ~ 3 km, and the corresponding density ~ 2*10¹⁹ kg/m³.

If I remember right, the Chandrasekar limit, above which a collapsing star forms a black hole, is 2.3 solar masses. Putting that in, gives Schwarzchild radius ~ 7 km and density ~ 1.5*10¹⁸ kg/m³. Sounds about right as this is the density of a neutron star (which is like a big nucleus), 10¹⁵ x water. Typical diameter of an atom is 10^-10 m, of a nucleus 10^-15 m, so density ratio = 10¹⁵.

For a smaller mass the density of a black hole is higher, eg for Earth's mass it's ~ 7*10³⁵ kg/m³. So a high enough mass can become a black hole through gravitational collapse, but a smaller would have to compresed by something external.

That's my take on it anyway.

You should order the LynDoor™Industries, Uncle Al's Space Explorer's Experiment Kit. It comes with a free 2x4 foot wall mounted E=Mc² Poster, suitable for framing.

It includes three black holes _{(small, medium and large)}, two dwarf stars, (one red one green) four super novas and a selection of space dust, all for the low introductory price of $6,000,000,000.99USD. Special shipping and handling charges apply. _{Black holes and dwarf stars cannot be shipped by air. Batteries not included. Suggested power source is 6000AMP 480V 240Hz. Parental supervision required. Not responsible for the obliteration of any cities or countries resulting from the use of this product.}

_{I have nothing constructive to add.}

So anyhow... Well okay I am completely lost on this question and the answers so far.

If a piece of dwarf star material was to somehow end up on earth would it rebound back from its super compressed state or stay that way and basically just sink right through the ground until it hit something solid enough, if possible, to support its equivalent mass in its given tiny size?

That is would my 100,000 ton pencil sized sky scraper building rebound back to a near normal size or would it tend to stay physicaly and just sink into the ground until it reached the center of the earth?

Personally I am guessing that since I have never heard of any unnaturaly dense meteorites ever having been found that such compressed matter that may have been somehow ejected from such a location springs back to its more normal way of being after some time is spent away from said super gravitational compressive forces.

Yea I know today I am a monkey with a keyboard who is getting in way over his head with a theoretical question.

Still fun to ponder it though!

"If a piece of dwarf star material was to somehow end up on earth would it rebound back from its super compressed state or stay that way and basically just sink right through the ground until it hit something solid enough, if possible, to support its equivalent mass in its given tiny size?"

Particle physics is not my field, but I'm lead to understand that (say) just a piece of neutron star could be isolated and released into empty space, it would decay into a myriad of particles. In a sense, when CERN smashes counter-circumnavigating protons into each other, they could have that sort of momentary energy and then decay rapidly.

That leads to the "tipping point". At some point, there are just enough neutrons for gravity to hold them together; but take one? away and it becomes an unstable atomic nucleus.

I don't have the answer for this, but clearly it is the internal gravity of a stellar object that causes the collapse into a dwarf star, neutron star, or in extreme cases a black hole. In a dwarf star the protons, neutrons and electrons are packed very closely together, but they maintain their identities. Since like forces repel, the protons (all +1) would repel each other and your 'piece' of collapsed star would overcome the much reduced internal gravity and would expand dramatically.

So the question would seem to be: does the more extreme collapse in a neutron star, where the protons and electrons are forced together creating nothing but neutrons (with no charge and therefore no electromagnetic force) form a stable crystalline structure? Which of the four known forces could supply the energy to maintain such a crystal? Since your pencil sized piece has much less mass than even a small star there would not be enough gravity. Since none of the particles have a charge any more electromagnetism would not be an issue. That leaves only the 'strong' and 'electro-weak' forces.

Neutrons are composed of 3 quarks, it is believed that the interior of neutron stars could be compressed to point that the neutrons have collapsed into pure quark soup, or strange matter....Neutrons do have mass though, and if gravity is a product of mass density then, then we would have some heavy soup..

100,000 tonne of neutron star isn't compressed anywhere near enough to stay that way if removed from the star. The neutrons would decay, presumably into the electrons and protons that made them when the neutron star was formed.

100,000 tonne at neutron star density 10¹⁸ kg/m³ has radius ~ 0.3 mm. Its Schwarzchild radius ~ 10^-16 mm and density when compressed to that radius (when it would remain as a black hole) is ~ 10⁶⁴ kg/m³.

Once your matter gets compressed that much, the adjacent space will no longer be "normal"; so I'm not sure this is viable.

Bill DeSmedt's novel Singularity is a great take-off on the idea that the 1908 Tunguska event was a black hole. (It was published by a small house in Seattle, and the editing is weak, but nonetheless it is a fun read.)

Hey, free podcast for this book...if anybody is interested..

http://www.podiobooks.com/title/singularity

Are we discussing compressed matter or internally dense matter? A sausage may initially be considered compressed by the skin but if you then take the skin away, you have dense matter.

What about a "neutron star", some consider it to be one large molecule!!

I'm betting on post# 19.

I gotta think that the only reason that there is so much gravitational force involved with something like a black hole is because that much matter has gathered there in the first place.

Every situation depends on it's context, - you don't worry about a man kissing a woman unless it is your woman kissing another man, - similiarly, compressed matter is only compressed if it is in the region of the other matter that is compressing it, - certainly there are, in science fiction, "mini" black holes, but they always have the mass of the star that created them, - with! I suspect that the imagined reality needs to correspond to the real reality insofar as that is possible, but in this day and age, proof is important. However, we are a long way from understanding, 'what is gravity". I remain humble and open. Cheers, Geoff.

Yes I have thought about gravity and what it could possibly be, I have been playing around with a concept, and it fits in quite well with your discussion. My latest thoughts are that gravity is directly related to E=mc², every electron, proton and neutron has the same mass, why? These particles have the same mass if they are in our galaxy or in some other distant galaxy many light years away, why? So is there another force of equilibrium whose purpose is to see that energy is equally divided throughout the universe according too a particles mass? This then leads into what gravity may be? A prime atom is the hydrogen atom, an electron and a proton, where the force of equilibrium and the equation E=mc², ensures that it has a level of energy equivalent to every other hydrogen atom, Now a neutron is an electron and proton combined, but in doing so gives up some of its mass and energy, So does the force of equilibrium reacts to this and sets up a potential, like the voltage between an electron and proton, and that potential force being gravity? So the more neutrons you have the more potential and gravity there is? There is more logic too this, but, this is enough to decide whether it got potential or just rubbish?

Regards JD

There is more logic? I would like to follow up on that statement, it may or may not have some potential? The concept goes that the force of equilibrium sets up a potential between hydrogen atoms and neutrons, and like electrical potential they repel their own kind, hydrogen becoming a gas and neutrons also repelling each other, but as a neutron is an electron and proton combined the force of equilibrium reacts compressing the neutrons to raise the energy level per volume like an electrical capacitor. The logic leads into radioactivity, where there is possibly a window of opportunity for radioactive material to repel a neutron, the energy to do so coming from the other neutrons? So the logic is leading up too the handling of radioactive waste, could radioactive waste be placed in a container filled with hydrogen and pressurised, the theory being, if there is a potential between the hydrogen and neutrons, that the neutrons will be drawn out of the material and combine with an a hydrogen atom to create an isotope. I know this is stretching it a bit, but, if there is someone that's curious, they may want do some experimenting.

Regards JD

Half the answer is in the question itself. The matter is compressed. What compresses it? What resists that compression?

A black hole can remain compressed because the forces compressing it are sourced from within the matter of the black hole itself. But the forces that are compressing a piece of Neutron star or other "non-blackhole" material still has the requisite internal forces resisting compression. Those forces are electro-magnetic for the less compressed/dense material, and are strong nuclear/weak nuclear for something like a neutron star.

These materials, in order to remain compressed, must have a containment force that is at least equal to the gravitational forces that compressed it. That means that the containment vessel, no matter what it is made from, must posses the equivalent of the mass of the star you do NOT have within the vessel. The container would be even more esoteric and strange than the contents in that case! Since such a container cannot exist outside of naturaly occurring stars, then the material will expand, rapidly. When a nova happens, it happens because the internal forces are that much greater in strength than the attractive forces within the star. Your sample is like a balloon inflated at the bottom of the ocean, and you want to bring it to the surface! It won't survive the trip!

I assume the neutron star was the result of elements forming and condensing from the temperature of the big bang and once formed would be stable like gold, lead or iron.

The neutron meteor would sink into the Earth to the centre but in doing so suck in the surrounding earth to a similar density and maybe into a its own black hole

Well it's possible that all planetary bodies have some sort of attractive force at the center, and that's what caused the planet or star to form in the first place...Maybe even some sort of miniature dark matter black hole that doesn't have the gravitational force of a regular black hole because it is in some sort of other dimension...I would think that once an atom has collapsed that it would remain so unless acted on with some tremendous force...They say the atoms become stretched in some neutron stars so that they are in the shape of a pin, having not fully collapsed...In this case it would seem that there might be relaxation of this condition once removed from it's compressing environment, this could result in normalization.. I'm starting to believe gravity is a function of enthalpy and built in to space/time and velocity determined by potential vs kinetic energy....

So therefore a neutron is not the smallest particle? But a neutron times a billion trillion times the size of a pin hear would weigh a ton

A neutron is not the smallest particle by a long way. An electron has mass ~ 1/2000 x neutron, and there's a lot of other small ones.

Not sure what you mean by "a neutron times a billion trillion times the size of a pin head", but the mass of a neutron is 10^-24 gm (to the nearest order of magnitude) so a billion trillion (10²¹) of them have mass 1 milligram. Elementary particles are very small! Also if they were clumped together (impossible in practice) diameter is neutron dia x ³√(10²¹) = 10^-15 m*10⁷ = 10^-8 m = 0.01 μm.

So if I am understanding this properly there is a limit that theoretically defines a point of change between being able to rebound back into a somewhat normal mass to volume ratio opposed to just staying super compressed?

That is my 100,000 ton mass squeezed into a pencil sized volume would return to normal where as if it was a large mountain compressed into a grain of dust it might not?

Lastly when the wife asks me what I am laying awake and thinking about tonight how should I respond?

That's right, it's the Schwartzchild radius, see my #5, and I gave the figures for 100,000 ton in #29. But it's a lot smaller than a grain of dust, even for the mass of a large mountain, say 10¹² tonne. I make it 10^-6 μm, and density 10⁵⁰ kg/m³. Radius at nuclear density is ~ 60 mm.

You could always tell your wife the truth, I don't suppose she'll believe you whatever you say .

If matter was compressed to a black hole and a piece taken out, and its mass was more than about 3.2 solar masses, it would remain stable.

If smaller than 3.2, don't know (refer to black hole discussions).

If matter was compressed to a neutron star, and a piece taken out, here is a possible scenario:

Up to now gravity has been the dominant force. With gravity non-dominant, the neutrons would move apart to radii where the Strong Nuclear Force is at a maximum ie the mass would expand several times. However with this movement, many neutrons would rebound to a place where they were outside the radius where the strong force operates. They would be essentially free neutrons. Neutrons in a nucleus are supposedly stable (possibly because they break up and reform constantly). Free neutrons are subject to the Weak Nuclear Force and have a half-life of about 10 mins. A free neutron breaks up into a proton, electron and anti-neutrino. Electrons would on the average tend to evaporate from the mass, some would recombine with protons. Some anti-neutrino energy would be absorbed by the mass, increasing the energy of the particles within.

Once a large number of protons have been created, you have a large standard nucleus. If there are only about 200 particles or less within the mass or within a small area of the mass, a local nucleus of ordinary matter could develop. A larger mass would become unstable and would fission. For the large mass (>200 particles), there is going to be an explosion, the time and extent determined by the mass of neutron star removed.

My guest is that if the conditions change in a super dense material it will explode like a balloon pinched with a pin, like the air coming out of the compressed tank in a compressor.

But I have another question. If nothing escape from a black hole it include the gravity. is the gravity able to go out or the gravity is coming only from the material that didn't cross the point of no return.

Seems to me, if it has given up all its energy [via gamma radiation] then what you have is a 'new substance', that is as it is.

It could be an adventure getting hold of some, though.

But if it was all about the gravitational field, you might try to find out if astronauts got bigger on the moon.

It has been explained to me before that the density of a black hole is so devastating to space time that it actually becomes a "rip" in space time and the mass that once existed has now been transformed in to pure energy which remains until the universe is able to dissipate the energy and repair it self via Hawking radiation. This was all told to me by a string theorist which I understand is still a theoretical science and although I am fascinated by the subject I am a layman please feel free to correct me. I don't want to spread pseudo-science and I would be fascinated to get better perspective in to the truths and lies of what I just said

Hi RedJohn,

Welcome to CR4. Black holes are theoretical, though many scientists believe they are real. On the right side of your screen you will find "Search all of CR4". In the box below it, type "Black Hole", and click Go. You will get a screen full of previous discussions about black holes. You may have to scroll down to find a different one. Read a few of them. You will learn a lot. Also there are many links on the internet. Have fun.

-S

I think this is somewhat dependant on what sort of exotic material you have. A super dense star for instance, is mostly highly compressed gas, which will simply decompress when not under high gravity - but the neutron superfluid may behave quite differently, since it does not consist of molecules, no electron shells that repell each other, etc. Neutrons do not repell one another and are quite stable, so they are not going to decompress the way gasses do; the only energy they would have would be heat energy - think more along the lines of liquid Helium Superfluid. I think its possible for Supercooled Neutron Superfluid to exist on earth - at least for short periods of time...