Talk:Neutron star merger
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
basic text grabbed from Stellar collision Ethanbas (talk) 18:02, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
This should be moved to importance: high[edit]
The actual detection and subsequent confirmation/nullification of dozens of longstanding hypotheses, including ones as important as 'where do heavy elements come from?' is a big deal. The black hole merger was amazing to the scientific community, but for most people, the fact it confirms relativity is not tangible enough to matter. This event, however, seems to have produced a glut of tangible tidbits that get people interested, like the statistic on the amount of gold in the resulting explosion. The fact the aftermath is in the visible spectrum is also gold, in terms of this.
So to that end, I propose that this article be moved to high importance, and perhaps another article like 'List of hypotheses confirmed by neutron star collisions' could be created as well. An entry in simple wikipedia would be great as well.
Show the tangible, empirical results that big projects like LIGO enable. Get science on the stage in this 'post-fact' time and show it's not just a bunch of math, that has no meaningful bearing on reality to the average person. Show that the scientific method makes predictions you can see with your own eyes. Lucasmarcelli (talk) 15:51, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
- Per the current guidelines I've rated this as mid, but GW170817 as high. Modest Genius talk 17:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thomas Tauris, Aarhus Institute of Advanced Studies, Denmark modeled ultra-stripped supernovae in 2013. The event iPTF 14gqr is evidence for an ultrastripped supernova which corroborates Tauris' 2013 prediction.[1]
- --Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 12:18, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
References
- ^ Lisa Grossman (11 October 2018) "The first observed wimpy supernova may have birthed a neutron star duo: The explosion could explain the source of some gravitational waves"
- Ryan F. Mandelbaum (11 Oct 2018) New Supernova Discovery Explains Landmark Neutron Star Collision
- K. De et al. A hot and fast ultra-stripped supernova that likely formed a compact neutron star binary. Science. Vol. 362, October 12, 2018, p. 201. doi:10.1126/science.aas8693.
Content requests
I am an editing noob but a frequent user/donor. I just want to second the assertion that this article is highly important and missing a lot. One missing thing: an explanation of how neutron star mergers might be locations for r-process nucleosynthesis for neutron-rich elements. Specifically, where do the protons come from? This is important because half the elements on the periodic table are believed to have been created through neutron star mergers. See here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nucleosynthesis_periodic_table.svg Sti11w4ter (talk) 00:42, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
- The article supernovae states: "In supernovae, r-process reactions are responsible for about half of all the isotopes of elements beyond iron,[131] although neutron star mergers may be the main astrophysical source for many of these elements." and gives two references, so this article should mention the same assertion. John a s (talk) 08:21, 31 July 2020 (UTC)