Slashdot Mirror
A Shocking Space Movie
MagnetarJones writes "Multiple observations made over several months with the Chandra X-ray Observatory and the Hubble Space Telescope captured the spectacle of matter and antimatter propelled to nearly the speed of light by the Crab pulsar, a rapidly rotating neutron star the size of Manhattan. "Through this movie, the Crab Nebula has come to life," says Jeff Hester of Arizona State University."
These are the links you want:
movies
article/images
more images
Can someone mirror these?
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
Maybe because they're moving at identical speeds in opposite directions under the influence of a magnetic field?
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
At 1.4 solar masses (that's about 3*10^30 kg), also called the Chandrasekhar limit, a white dwarf collapses since degenerate electron pressure can't hold off the gravitational force and collapses into the neutron star.
A neutron star is ALWAYS between 1.4 and 3 solar masses. (above this limit, the neutrons themselves degenerate and form a black hole)
So yes, I think a stick deserves to be respected as much as a tree if it weighed 5 metric tons!
From: "Koczor, Ron"
/ 19sep_crab movie.htm?list139810
To: 'Robert Claypool '
Subject :
RE: Crab pulsar article
Actually, based on the comments we've received from readers, the
comparison was a good one. Our intention was to demonstrate to people the
"size" of the star. And I think most people understood that we were talking
about size as the diameter of the star. Most people think of the size of
astronomical objects in linear dimensions, not volume.
When people think of stars they think of massive objects bigger than
earth. By comparing it to a well-known earth landmark, the imagery of size
becomes clearer.
I'm sorry the comparison didn't work for you.
Ron
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Claypool
To: ron.koczor@msfc.nasa.gov
Sent: 9/20/02 6:34 PM
Subject: Crab pulsar article
This article:
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002
lists you as the responsible NASA official. It doesn't make sense to me why
there is a comparison between the Crab pulsar and Manhattan, especially in
the light of a lack of conventional figures, such as cubic kilometers and
kilograms. Further the Crab pulsar is a small star, while Manhattan is a big
city. Comparing them creates a dissonance in the sense of size one usually
tries to create when making such a comparison. I would appreciate it if NASA
took these into consideration in future articles.