3 ms·

> Pulsars(rotating neutron stars) Thanks. I was going to ask whether the article was using the term "pulsar" when "neutron star" would have been more accurate

> Pulsars(rotating neutron stars) Thanks. I was going to ask whether the article was using the term "pulsar" when "neutron star" would have been more accurate; I would have said that a pulsar was a rotating neutron star with a beam that intermittently points at Earth (making the distinction observer-specific). But don't essentially all neutron stars spin? I don't know how a non-rotating neutron star might form. If that's the case, they could have just said "neutron star", and I wouldn't then have this issue about the subjectivity of what a pulsar is.

ben_w 3y ago
> But don't essentially all neutron stars spin? Almost certainly, though they do slow down over time. The distinction is indeed observer-specific, which doesn't matter yet, but will eventually matter for things like the "galactic positioning system" that sometimes gets suggested as a galaxy-wide extension of the current research on pulsar-based_navigation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsar-based_navigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsar-based_navigation
superjan 3y ago
The neutron stars that the article uses to explain the observed antimatter all must spin to cause the radiation observed. They would appear as pulsars to some observer, not necessarily us here on earth.