GeeKay Posted May 6, 2015 Share Posted May 6, 2015 Neutron stars have been described as the most powerful bar magnets in the known universe. This being so, is it possible for the magnetic fields of such compact objects to take precedence even over their gravity fields? An example: would a small object captured by a given neutron star wind up impacting upon one or other of its magnetic poles, rather than gravity pulling it down to impact anywhere else on the star's surface/photosphere? Many thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 6, 2015 Share Posted May 6, 2015 It's not one vs the other, since magnetism can give rise to an attractive force, and since these are dipoles, all you have to do is flip the orientation of the smaller object if you initially had repulsion. So precedence really isn't a worry. Would you have preferential impact at the magnetic poles? Sure. I see no reason why not, since the attraction of a magnetic particle would be stronger there, and also for charged particles, they will tend to be funneled in that direction. That's what happens on earth with the solar wind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeeKay Posted May 7, 2015 Author Share Posted May 7, 2015 Thank you. To clarify things then: any non-magnetically charged object gravitationally drawn to an ultra-compact body like a neutron star can, depending on its trajectory, impact upon any part of its surface, not just at its magnetic poles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Thank you. To clarify things then: any non-magnetically charged object gravitationally drawn to an ultra-compact body like a neutron star can, depending on its trajectory, impact upon any part of its surface, not just at its magnetic poles. I'm not sure what you mean by "non-magnetically charged", but the answer is probably yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeeKay Posted May 9, 2015 Author Share Posted May 9, 2015 My apologies. By a "non-magnetically charged object" I meant non-ferrous minerals and metals, like copper, nickel, cobalt, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 My apologies. By a "non-magnetically charged object" I meant non-ferrous minerals and metals, like copper, nickel, cobalt, etc. Non-ferrous materials still exhibit magnetism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamagnetism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramagnetism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now