4 ms·
As the other person responded, they have seen a neutron star merger, and I believe that is the one they were able to observe with EM radiation as well. Also th
by netcraft 6y ago
As the other person responded, they have seen a neutron star merger, and I believe that is the one they were able to observe with EM radiation as well. Also this event they suspect the larger mass was a black hole, they aren't sure of the smaller one.
- phyzome 6y agoSo that means this object could well have been the result of such a merger, right? I guess I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. "Oh neat, we found something in this mass gap" seems reasonable, but the "changes astronomy" headline seems completely unsupported.
- netcraft 6y agoNo - neutron stars can merge to form a black hole or a larger neutron star, but it was thought that this mass-gap is beyond a threshold that was too small to form a black hole, but too large to still be a neutron star. The fuss is that this mass-gap has been something that was theorized but also backed up by a (lack of) astronomical observations. This result means that it is possible to have _something_ in this range, and the fact that it was detected so "early" in gravitational wave observations suggests that they are more common than we otherwise would have thought, again from theory and previous observations. Hence, there's something we don't understand about these objects.
- phyzome 6y ago« This result means that it is possible to have _something_ in this range » What would it even mean for it not to be possible? Two neutron stars of appropriate size collide -- you end up with something. I'm sure the physics are interesting in this range, but I have a hard time understanding how it could just not be possible. (Rare, yes.)