Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Waspie_Dwarf

Mysterious magnetar

25 posts in this topic

Mysterious magnetar boasts one of strongest magnetic fields in Universe

14 August 2013 Scientists using ESA’s XMM-Newton space telescope have discovered that a curious dead star has been hiding one of the strongest magnetic fields in the Universe all along, despite earlier suggestions of an unusually low magnetic field.

The object, known as SGR 0418+5729 (or SGR 0418 for short), is a magnetar, a particular kind of neutron star.

A neutron star is the dead core of a once massive star that collapsed in on itself after burning up all its fuel and exploding in a dramatic supernova event. They are extraordinarily dense objects, packing more than the mass of our Sun into a sphere only some 20 km across – about the size of a city.

arrow3.gifRead more...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this article extremely attractive, lol.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was rather drawn to it myself.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really did have a sort of pull?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it really sucked me in.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once was almost, but not quite amusing. The same (almost) joke four times is just getting boring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the way Mr. Gray, who likes to imagine himself to be a science correspondent, goes to great length to explain to us bonehead readers what the unit used to measure magnetic fields is. Let's see:

"They calculated that SGR 0418 must have a magnetic field of more than 1 quadrillion, or 1,000 trillion, guass, the unit used to measure the strength of a magnetic field.

By comparison, the iron core of the Earth is thought to have a magnetic field of 25 guass."

Anything seem wrong with that to anyone? :D You don't make the same typo twice now do ya? Even my browser corrects it for me in this reply. Was he using Word95?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once was almost, but not quite amusing. The same (almost) joke four times is just getting boring.

Man talk about polar opposites.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The statement from the article I find interesting is this:

They are extraordinarily dense objects, packing more than the mass of our Sun into a sphere only some 20 km(about 12.5 miles) across – about the size of a city.

Whereas our Sun is about 865,000 miles across. With a 69,200th reduction in diameter, yet with the same mass, that's awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only 20 trillion fridge magenets? Watch out SGR0418...I'm closing in on you rapidly and will soon become the strongest magnetic source in the universe BWAHAHAHA

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If everyone on the planet buys about 20,000 fridge magnets we can equal this power!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You wouldn't want to fly to close or it would be come a fatal attraction. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You wouldn't want to fly to close or it would be come a fatal attraction. :yes:

I'll stick with that thought as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that's where my keys went.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say Waspie, when you come back to this site:

Your subtitle says..."One of (the) strongest magnetic fields in (the) Universe"

Do you know what currently is the leader? I presume it's a magnetar, or something done on Earth. And how strong is it, say, compared to the 20 trillion fridge magnetic strength suggested for this magnetar?

Edited by pallidin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know what currently is the leader? I presume it's a magnetar, or something done on Earth. And how strong is it, say, compared to the 20 trillion fridge magnetic strength suggested for this magnetar?

All very good questions to which I have no good answers.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to leave UM for the entirety of August, just to have a break.... but this is some of the worst Science that I have ever had the displeasure to read. How about actually using th SI Unit of magnetism (the Tesla) to try and describe this phenomena?

How has the Flux Density been derived? 6500 light years away? and to be honest the "Trillions" of fridge magnets is by far, the worst analogy in the Universe because absolutely NO value for a fridge magnet is given.

I truly despair of some of the science on this site...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I love the way Mr. Gray, who likes to imagine himself to be a science correspondent, goes to great length to explain to us bonehead readers what the unit used to measure magnetic fields is. Let's see: "They calculated that SGR 0418 must have a magnetic field of more than 1 quadrillion, or 1,000 trillion, guass, the unit used to measure the strength of a magnetic field. By comparison, the iron core of the Earth is thought to have a magnetic field of 25 guass." Anything seem wrong with that to anyone? :D You don't make the same typo twice now do ya? Even my browser corrects it for me in this reply. Was he using Word95?

I am slightly puzzled as to why, in a rather interesting subject, the only thing you thought worthy of commenting on was a simple typo.

I am a little puzzled as to why you are attacking a newspaper article which is not even part of the original post I made.

I am even more puzzled as to why you did not make it clear that it was not the original post you were quoting.

Finally my puzzlement reaches a peak as I ponder why I had to search for the article you were quoting when the rules of this site specifically state that you must provide a link to any external articles you quote. The article can be found here: The Telegraph

Incidentally the typos in the article which you were so busy pointing out to us that you managed to forget to tell us WHERE they were have now been corrected although the article continues to be inconsistent with capitalisation of Gauss.

How has the Flux Density been derived? 6500 light years away? and to be honest the "Trillions" of fridge magnets is by far, the worst analogy in the Universe because absolutely NO value for a fridge magnet is given. I truly despair of some of the science on this site...

Keith, it's a bit unfair to blame this site for poorly written article elsewhere, especially articles which weren't even part of the original post. The ESA article I quoted makes no mention of fridge magnets.

I share your annoyance with the way that science is reported but lets not forget that most people would have no idea what sort of strength a Tesla relates to. Reporting complex scientific issues for the layman can't be easy.

As for the original article using Gauss instead of Tesla as the unit, I guess old habits die hard.

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the way Mr. Gray, who likes to imagine himself to be a science correspondent, goes to great length to explain to us bonehead readers what the unit used to measure magnetic fields is. Let's see:

"They calculated that SGR 0418 must have a magnetic field of more than 1 quadrillion, or 1,000 trillion, guass, the unit used to measure the strength of a magnetic field.

By comparison, the iron core of the Earth is thought to have a magnetic field of 25 guass."

Anything seem wrong with that to anyone? :D You don't make the same typo twice now do ya? Even my browser corrects it for me in this reply. Was he using Word95?

The gauss, abbreviated as G, is the cgs unit of measurement of a magnetic field B, which is also known as the "magnetic flux density" or the "magnetic induction".

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDoQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FGauss_(unit)&ei=pUESUu6mF8fxiwLzroCYBA&usg=AFQjCNE8vjhfGY4lP-SX1uAsiqnsaQCKcA&sig2=ax7kBzOaLIxW97AZ04ycJQ&bvm=bv.50952593,d.cGE&cad=rja

The Gauss principle is named after the mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss. an easy mistake to transpose letters. not everyone uses spellcheck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Gauss principle is named after the mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss. an easy mistake to transpose letters. not everyone uses spellcheck.

I suspect Rolci is aware of what the Gauss is. It was the fact that is was spelt Guass twice in a, supposedly, high quality national newspaper that he was pointing out.

Although, of course, the fact that he totally omitted to mention where the quote came from made his post rather pointless.

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to leave UM for the entirety of August, just to have a break.... but this is some of the worst Science that I have ever had the displeasure to read. How about actually using th SI Unit of magnetism (the Tesla) to try and describe this phenomena?

How has the Flux Density been derived? 6500 light years away? and to be honest the "Trillions" of fridge magnets is by far, the worst analogy in the Universe because absolutely NO value for a fridge magnet is given.

I truly despair of some of the science on this site...

As a non-physicist, I actually appreciate something related in terms that a layman might grasp(20 trillion fridge magnets) as opposed to the more specific definitions. This is not a "scientific" site.

However, there is one that is quite admirable... www.physicsforums.com if you so desire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a non-physicist, I actually appreciate something related in terms that a layman might grasp(20 trillion fridge magnets) as opposed to the more specific definitions. This is not a "scientific" site.

However, there is one that is quite admirable... www.physicsforums.com if you so desire.

Maybe I should have said "referenced Science Articles"... To be honest I cannot even grasp how big 20 Trillion is!!Cant really get my head to imagine what 20 Trillion Fridge Magnets would look like.... I have been a contributor to Physicsforum for many years and whilst it is indeed an admirable site, it is also (IMO) rather entrenched in science Orthodoxy.

Edited by keithisco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only 20 trillion fridge magenets? Watch out SGR0418...I'm closing in on you rapidly and will soon become the strongest magnetic source in the universe BWAHAHAHA

I'm going for 20 trillion and one magnets - fear my wrath!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what the prior analytical techniques were that gave them such a wrong answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.