NASA | Colliding Neutron Stars Create Black Hole and Gamma-ray Burst

Armed with state-of-the-art supercomputer models, scientists have shown that colliding neutron stars can produce the energetic jet required for a gamma-ray burst. Earlier simulations demonstrated that mergers could make black holes. Others had shown that the high-speed particle jets needed to make a gamma-ray burst would continue if placed in the swirling wreckage of a recent merger.
Now, the simulations reveal the middle step of the process--how the merging stars' magnetic field organizes itself into outwardly directed components capable of forming a jet. The Damiana supercomputer at Germany's Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics needed six weeks to reveal the details of a process that unfolds in just 35 thousandths of a second--less than the blink of an eye.
Read more: www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/...
This video is public domain and can be downloaded at: ‪svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/goto?10740
Like our videos? Subscribe to NASA's Goddard Shorts HD podcast:
‪svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/iTunes/f...
Or find NASA Goddard Space Flight Center on facebook:
‪ / nasa.gsfc‬
Or find us on Twitter:
‪ / nasagoddard

[@Messier31NGC224]

Oh my god that is amazing! The scales, densities, and energies involved are incomprehensibly large for me. Thanks for the briefing. - John (undergrad studying physics)

[@extropian314]

1:06 "Just a sugar cube sized piece of nautron star can weigh as much as all the water in the Great Lakes." Hmm for the Great Lakes' total weight, my calculations show 20,000 billion tons. A sugar cube is about a teaspoon; a tsp of the core of a neutron star is thought to weigh probably 10 billion tons (at a density of 1e15 g/cm^3). So this would be off by a factor of roughly 2,000.

[@levihuerta9393]

What the hell is 20,000 billion tons??? Would that make it 20 trillion tons? Also I think your calculations are off as well

[@pullupongamestop5566]

Tony Wells smh

[@williamreilly3172]

Lsd

[@incription]

Great Lakes = 1.8x10^13 tons, much more than 1x10^9, so yes you are correct

[@CROUTONZZ]

I was wondering about this recently, thanks for the video.

[@DinoBoiRex]

But what is a star? *Vsauce music plays*

[@cattitude2]

Star is a star *Vsauce music stops playing*

[@DinoBoiRex]

@@cattitude2 thanks vsauc

[@DjSharperimage]

It's amazing how it happens soooo fast

[@upsty6499]

What an amazing sight, wish I could see this 1st hand. What an awesome sight.

[@monuvishwakarma2458]

thanks for great knowledge

[@PlaceholderOne]

Wow, love this stuff!

[@ARTVBASIC]

So true and very well said AzaDee... we pay too much attention to our little insignificant differences and fail to see the bigger picture.

[@keithwright5937]

Neutron stars formed from supernova events are prohibited from becoming black holes because it is thought that the gravitational force is not enough to overcome Fermi degeneracy of the neutrons or quark gluon soup at the core of these objects, however, addition of more mass can overcome this repulsion and form a black hole. My question is are black hole "cores" not singularities but instead massive bosons formed by the gravitational effects forcing quarks into a singular microstate similar to the formation of Cooper pairs?

[@discountconsulting]

What is the degeneracy pressure of neutrons based on? How is it even possible to know what the volume of a neutron would be within a neutron star? After all, the only observable neutrons outside a neutron star are compacted into the nucleus of atoms whose volume is due primarily to the electrons. Even if the volume of atomic nuclei is estimable somehow, what basis would there be for assuming that the same nucleons would have the same volume within a neutron star or other high-mass scenario where the tendency of large nuclei to fission is suppressed by gravity and whatever else happens to space-time within such dense environments?

[@keithwright5937]

I must read more, perhaps CERN or FermiLab may have information on the compression of atomic nuclei in an environment of high speed collisions, not quite the environs of a high mass compact object but maybe enough information to give a glue which evidently I don't have, Thank you for responding to my question, discountconsulting, you rock!

[@discountconsulting]

Keith Wright Thanks for the compliment. I have heard that very heavy short-lived atoms are created using particle accelerators so maybe some neutrons are actually created in the process. Still, the fact that the lifespan of such heavy atoms decreases with atomic weight implies that something changes when the nuclei begin growing large enough to stabilize as a neutron star. I can't fathom how nuclear force and gravity work together to stabilize neutronium in such massive quantities let alone what would result in its further compression. Maybe neutron stars have fissioning cores that keep them expanded to volumes greater than their swartzschild radius and if the entire star would collapse to suppress the fission, it would already be smaller than the swartzschild. How can anyone know?

[@keithwright5937]

Would a fissioning core give a particular neutrino signature not attributed to the initial collapse? As you've implied, the physics of the state of a neutron star core is not well understood but we know that mass/energy must follow spacetime structure, i.e. neutrino emissions from fission of heavy neuclei in a compressed core may be detected (perhaps in Japan?) similar to neutrino detection of SN1987A. Nonetheless you've managed to give me even more to ponder, thanks. :)

[@discountconsulting]

Keith Wright I don't know if emissions from a fissioning core or other internal emissions would be detectable outside the star. In a computer simulation, you see all the particles in the star at the same time but when you're observing emissions, the neutrinos would have to pass through the rest of the star unaltered before exiting it. Supposedly there are many more neutrinos that pass through, say, the Earth than neutrinos that interact with particles within the Earth but the core of a star is much more dense and energetic so isn't it likely that those neutrinos could get absorbed, scattered, etc. (much like photons) a great deal before exiting the star in the form we would observe reaching a detector?

[@ensomniiac]

This was actually proven today. Good job👌

[@bipolatelly9806]

Nothing was proven. Except you are a junk science fan.

[@aliasred28]

@@bipolatelly9806 Junk? Science is the reason how your family bought you a phone and you're wasting it your knowledge is trash

[@senatorjosephmccarthy2720]

@@aliasred28 , type: KZbin, Thunderbolts Project. Watch many.

[@CreepsCompilation]

Dude, what the hell??? Proven? This is literally computer generated graphics fool.. I discovered two leprechauns merge into a unicorn.. FACT, PROVEN

[@TrufflesSMA]

People are getting upset over a comment that was posted 2 YEARS AGO

[@peteraltonmertz4439]

A small note - The matter on the surface of the neutron stars will start experiencing smaller gravitational fields. Is Lagrange Point One figured into the calculations? Because at some point the degenerate pressure will overcome the gravitational pull and the matter will start flying off of the surface the stars at a high rate of speed in a rotating doughnut shape, which will be concentrated at the poles of LG1. You now have more than​ enough matter to create jets of plasma.

[@TheDrfoomanchu]

Well Whatever She just said about exploding stuff Is going on in my head

[@gepgeps]

Great video! 👏

[@DjSharperimage]

WOW!!! This is how BlackHoles are created; Amazing

[@jollysaxena2013]

Thnx Geoffrey keely.

[@Anonymoose]

Incredibly fascinating, and in a way it makes my brain hurt. As the scope of the known Cosmos expands, it becomes more and more intimidating.

[@kirox777]

wow gamma rays seem so amazing and beautiful! i want to warp through space where one is about to take place and look at it through a telescope *_*

[@RIOT690]

That's incredible :o

[@SubTachyon]

@AstroChispa Cheers. I asked because I was wondering whether or not they interact through Strong Force but from you calculations it would appear they do not.

[@oalithgow]

stunishing !!!

[@flagman57]

@julsHz yah it seems like it would be really complicated. I tried a non-graphical simulation of a ball bouncing (including the complete flex of the ball when it touches the ground), and that took months. The code on this would be insane.

[@user-sf4cf6lv6x]

すごい迫力だ

[@MatthewMk27]

That was so cool. Thanks NASA.

[@dragoncomunity]

awesome!!

[@weyoume0]

...and we have seen it last month!

[@MightySaturn5]

@bra13vo we were only teasing....hope you have a great weekend and take care

[@AnoNymous-js7qy]

Thank you! Yes I mixed up the two missions. I meant Opportunity!

[@z4k4z]

Seriously cool.

[@consciousenergies]

When the energetic pass by occurs in local space, what is the Doppler shift in the transverse electromagnetic wave propagation of this said instance? Is it still red shifting and at what frequency of propagation? Beautiful computer graphics btw, thanks for sharing.

[@thomasgade226]

GW170817 turned out to be spherical , as measured by strontium

[@sandeepjotriwal2635]

great info

[@MahsaSetareh]

the computer stimulated image at 1:22 ... is it from NASA? cuz I've seen the same with the Chandra Observatory...?? O__O

[@heloogangtas]

0:16 - 0:28 That's a Kamehameha

[@wessonsmithjr.6257]

The colliding of Neutron stars, termed a Kilinova, is where the heavier elements such as gold and platinum come from. It was incorrectly believed that these heavier elements came from Supernovas.

[@mallardhead]

thanks!

[@nicholasmaude6906]

I wonder if there's an updated version of this video?

[@GoreTorn16]

wow facinating!

[@Renegade30]

awesome video NASA, please keep up this style, i hate it when you dumb things down! :D

[@frankdavidson644]

Unbelievable wow

[@UnknownUser-tq6ru]

Was thinking that same damn thing as was going to post it too haha

[@thundur6996]

"At this moment, somewhere across the cosmos, it's about to happen again"

[@user-raf]

Спасибо очень красиво.

[@Mrdenverfan01]

This Short Gamma Ray is produced by means of a Binary System. The collision of these two compact objects, produces both a Kilonova and a Short Gamma Ray Burst. Once the hot gas is swallowed, it quickly becomes evident. The object that has swallowed this hot matter, is a black hole.

[@213SEMPERFI]

That's so true and this probably the best comment I ever came across.

[@manojsaxena1462]

These are like air bubbles or water temperature bubbles called liquid mass mean gases or plasma mix eachother at last.

[@adreq3.05]

For improoves of observations the black holes may to increase the wavelenght range sensors just installed. Objects rbiting around the earth could to coordinate each other for the researches of deep space. Launching new crafts will more expensive.

[@RockPwnsYou]

I may not understand a lot of this, but I still think it's cool...

[@energysage9774]

According to wikipedia, 22,671 cubic kilometers. Since the average density of water is 1.00 grams per cubic centimeter, that's 2.27 x 10^16 kilograms, or about 50,000,000,000,000,000 pounds.

[@martinhousemuse]

In other words, the variable lensing is more efficiently explained via plasma lensing. The variables seen are predicted using this model? Correct? They would also, then, be reproduce-able in a lab?

[@archonjubael]

Can I see the code for this simulation?

[@4fingers183]

Tenzin Lundrup ....did this Hebrew sponsored scamers just over-run the nuclear force within the nucleus, just so they could do the simulation? The only way the comp could end up with this is through mag. reconnection+thermodynamics+ELECTICIYIYITI!?!?....they solved nothing! Proven once more, just how retarded the standard model is....along with true believers. The Collective Amnesia Indoctrine?

[@elscientist]

+Jeremy Johnson Try sending a mail to the Max Planck institute for gravitational physics.

[@tim57243]

4 Fingers Since apparently the best argument you could construct depended on name-calling, you must not have had anything better. That is convenient to me because then I don't need to puzzle through your odd syntax and spelling to figure out what you meant.

[@fdistefano6297]

Can I see your math for your claims... Or is that somehow evil and conspiratorial to ask for your scientific proof?

[@bipolatelly9806]

@@fdistefano6297 pathetic. (your comment)

[@keithwright5937]

I guess what I'm asking is the following; 1) Is gravitation strong enough to overcome quantum fluctuations of the material (fermions) present at a neutron star core as it proceeds with additional mass to the transition from a neutron star towards full gravitational collapse and 2) would such material be compacted to the extent that there are no "degrees of freedom" essentially forcing fermions to exhibit bosonic character with a microstate of one at zero degrees Kelvin at the "core" thus avoiding singularity while preserving quantum number as well as mass - energy conservation? Present knowledge would suggest the short answer of no, I just want to know why. Respectfully, Keith Wright.

[@randbabs7381]

its strange enough to think that gravity is a strong enough force to make an object "collapse in on itself", what that means I don't know (subatomic collapse?) seems very unlikely to me. and with the addition of new possibly explosive material (such as a sun) wouldn't that then be the "death" of the black hole wouldn't a supernova have enough power to break open the core of the object.

[@keithwright5937]

Rand Babs It has been theorized that in certain situations gravity was as strong as the other fundamental forces, such as the big bang / early universe setting, perhaps the same scenario exists at the core of collapsed stars. The case of 2 neutron stars forming a black hole with a singularity at the center is reminiscent of two fermions forming a Cooper pair (massive boson) that doesn't require a singularity. I hypothesize that an object that has reached the Planck mass must become a boson in the relativistic conditions at the heart of a black hole and not a singularity. Consequently, the singularity at the beginning of the big bang should also be a boson. I can't prove any of this, I just hate singularities. :)

[@randbabs7381]

interesting thought. I think you are certainly on to something worthwhile because the subatomics of the black hole are very much open to reanalysis. personally I still don't understand why or if a singularity is necessary to the concept at all. it seems we could have a situation that is much more interesting than a magical point of density. and where could that lead?

[@keithwright5937]

The problem I have with physical singularities is rather simple. I don't believe there are infinities in nature, but when these infinities showed up in the formulation of QED they were renormalized with empirical data to fit what nature actually revealed. Should a theory arise that actually renormalizes the singularity similar to the renormalizing of the properties of electrons I think it would go far in explaining other phenomena such as dark energy ,big bang zero and the true nature of superconductivity as well as black holes. Mathematical singularities are probably ok as long as they are not used to describe infinities within the scope of what occurs naturally, it's sounds a little like killing a mosquito with a thermonuclear device.

[@swiessin]

@theycallmeken There is a video that NASAexplorer released about TGFs making antimatter. It's titled Terrestrial Gamma-ray Flashes Create Antimatter.

[@manojsaxena1462]

Actually theory behind so many blast in different form is to vacant space otherwise not space would be available to travel mean orbit or travel. It may be due heat or life cycle or else like supernova blast or else otherwise.

[@enriqueDFTL]

Amazing. =D

[@54bigchris]

It makes sense since black holes are that dense not even light can escape it Neutron star x neutron star = infinite density= black hole

[@SubTachyon]

Can any physicist or someone savvy in the field clarify this for me please: How close are neutrons to each other in a neutron star?

[@AnoNymous-js7qy]

Another example. How may "comet" impacts you expect in exact 90° to surface, so that a crater becomes round? 2%? 5%? Why the 90% of the craters in Sol system are round? Why lots of them have a very flat ground? Some with a hill in the middle? If you do heavy plasma discharges on a piece of metal it looks nearly identical. Including the hill in the middle.

[@b4byfac3]

Magneto !!

[@kcvriess]

6 Weeks of super computer number crunching in order for it to be presented as an animated 720p blurry pixel mess on KZbin. Doesn't really do it justice...

[@Awsomeguy011]

am i the only one listening to different music then the video? the music im playing goes well with the video

[@ShawnBoike]

We never seen this before. How can we use this to our advantage after mapping their locations?

[@geneticallyinferior1]

we can lure the aliens to it and yell "it's a trap!" when they get caught in between the colliding neutron stars. advantage - humans!

[@bunnyhead515]

so basically , to dumb this down, this is what happens when the super spicy burrito meets the stomach. burrito+stomach=massive fart. where the massive fart simulates the short gamma ray burst. simple stuff really.

[@FesteringRatSub]

nice

[@NeuroticKnight9]

yup, look down wikipedia for citations,

[@n3rdbear]

so if two black holes merge together, it cancels out and disappears from existence?

[@HotelPapa100]

No prediction of the genesis of heavy elements, though. Was this discovered only when we observed the first kilonova?

[@gustavbabic5004]

I don't know why, but for some reason I find these gamma-ray bursts to be the most terrifying things in the universe, and I'm wondering if they are the reason that we cannot find any ETs as we scan the skies? Is it possible that gamma-ray bursts might be responsible for some of the extinction level events that we've had here on Earth?

[@pocaentropia]

There is no supernova remnants or neutron pair near Earth. No explosion is responsable of any extinction. And there is no star close enough for this.

[@merveilmeok2416]

More terrifying than a croc, a gun, fire or war? Look at the probabilities.

[@gustavbabic5004]

More terrifying than sharks with freaking laser beams attached to their heads! I was sitting in a doctor's office one time, and I picked up a magazine of some sort that an article about these things. The article stated that a pair of colliding neutron stars could produce a gamma ray burst capable of sterilizing a huge part, if not all of our galaxy. I think that the article mentioned this as a possible cause as to why can't find any ETs, but I read the article about 15 years ago, so I don't really remember.

[@merveilmeok2416]

Doctors' office magazines are known for carrying germs from sick patients.

[@johnarmenta2199]

@@merveilmeok2416 So are door knobs.

[@AnoNymous-js7qy]

I watched the whole picture and didn't find much problems. Interresting are also the predictions on the website. If I watch at the standard model, it cranks on all corners. All few moths they find something what shouldn't exist. A star so big that it should be a black hole, a star so small that it shouldn't be able to launch fusion reaction. Suprizing new van allen layer that suddenly dissapears. .....

[@AbsoluteBumder]

Oh Mylanta, I get it, it's heavy. Leave me alone.

[@bertrandj.6976]

The night is dark and full of Terror.

[@titantvman746]

Wow

[@hypercube717]

Interesting

[@Mekratrig]

What aboot when a white dwarf mergers with a neutrong star? What would that belike?

[@cymoonrbacpro9426]

A case against neutron stars.The following is hypothetical scenario based on known physics, which would explain the Improbability of neutron stars ; Neutron is made out of an electron and proton and neutrino, (neutrons are Known to be unstable due to Beta decay) they say Neutrinos escapes because of nuclear decay and low mass or close to Zero mass the neutrinos would be lost Or radiated out, it must be remembered that neutrino is part of the ingredients of a neutron . After losing a neutrino what would be left is a proton and a electron, which would constitute the ingredients of a hydrogen atom not a neutron , being that the protons Is heavier (1800 x) then the Electron it is quite possible that the interior will become a large Proton like object, but only if there is enough gravity , there for, it should be called a proton star and not a neutron star,. The core would be of pure hydrogen nuclei. Between these two scenarios the most plausible would be proton star, because it is based on known physics. Neutron star Scenario just doesn’t make sense ! The fact is that a neutron stars is actually Hypotheticals objects and the physics that is suppose to supports this is vague . The Pauli exclusion principle Is introduce because it helps explain the density packing, but there are other forces That will inhibit these high densities ever being achieved. So there is no credible explanations about how the Neutron star would be kept together. This hypothetical neutron star explantation is one dimensional thinking, which ignores other factors in physics. This is all CG make believe, So don’t be fooled

[@martinhousemuse]

So gravity "lensing" is what? The bend in the space time continuum? Trying to grasp the basic terms.

[@FlemishBloke]

what happens when you put a magnetic spinning disc or fast spinning metal metal in a microwave? plasma maybe =jets

[@SubTachyon]

@AstroChispa Well this is what I was wondering about. Wouldnt they all innevitably end up undergoing fuison due to strong force and ending up in one giant super atom? Obviously they do not but why not?

[@senatorjosephmccarthy2720]

Type: KZbin, Thunderbolts Project. And watch many.

[@DjSharperimage]

I always knew a BlackHole was a Super Dense DarkStar, no one believed me tho...

[@bigeyesbiglies3196]

I was looking for Muse song...

[@selfworm]

+bigeyesbiglies And you found something better.

[@bigeyesbiglies3196]

Fseirst Lrest Yes, you're right :)

[@rustyfox301]

Looks like an embryo inversion

[@WeaselWJ]

@Xellith LOL :D

[@zhoma982]

喜欢

[@borderlandsgamer9001]

Just look at a map and see how large those lakes are. It shouldn't be that hard to conclude that the great lakes contain (pardon my New Joysian) a fuckton of water.

[@Orion3G]

@heloogangtas 0:30 spirit bomb xD

[@AnoNymous-js7qy]

a black hole shall become visible becasue the high gravity shall produce a lense in the space time continuum. So they picked out a galaxy that shoul contain a big black hole and measured how the lense affects starts behind. ONE value brought the expected data. The others not. so the shape of the lense must be different from the predicted one. They took this as proove for black holes. But plasma also forms lenses and they are shaped different. So they measured a lening, but a different type!

[@UnknownXV]

A sugar cube worth of Neutron Star Matter would have as much mass as Mount Everest or so.

[@AnoNymous-js7qy]

So we talk about a theory where we can say BEFORE we are there how the conditions should be, and NASA still hangs on the standard model and has one suprize after the other. Curiosity was a big curiosity for NASA. After 90 days the system should be down becasue of the dust on solar panels. It is operating now for nearly 9 JEARS! NASA is puzzled why. As Athmosphere is very dense in a charged environment you can expect that the electrostatic effect blows away the dust.

[@jonsmith6163]

got that right

[@martinhousemuse]

I have been going through lots of thunderbolts videos. Just watched a Nat Geo vid on the Milky Way. They show a massive simulation of the galaxy. What is that worth? Is the mapping off or just would an EU theoretician say that just the dark matter explanation is off?

[@projectjt3149]

So EVERY time two neutron stars collide, black holes form? Doesn't sound like those black holes are as big as those from hypernovae.

[@kotosqoposrly]

Well a sugar tea spoon is very small compared to an average lake. Don't you think so?

[@houstonpromotion]

So what’s the difference between a gamma ray burst and a quasar

[@AnoNymous-js7qy]

There's no dark matter required. It is much more worth as any other simulation we have. I can't tell you if it is valid. But from my standpoint with good education especially in electronics, I would say it is MUCH more plausible as the crap with big bang, space (=nothing) expands to whereever it shall expand. Artificial mathematical black holes. Gravity lensing is a theory connected to..... Measured data fit only in one special angle. Plasma also can lense, you know .... data fits better.

[@MrBiglou36]

No you are incorrect. I believe you are talking about the "opportunity" or "spirit" rovers, since curiosity has no solar panels and has been on mars no longer than a year.

[@MyChannel10198]

My brain is not smart enough to process this video’s information. Can someone tell me in short form how black hole is made?

[@JessicaTTG]

It just becomes a larger one.

[@keithwright5937]

I meant baryonic number, not quantum number.

[@thomaslemon7882]

Metallurgy applications? Hollow death star programs? Gravity well powered devices? Obviously beyond human nature but fun to think about...

[@Draxis32]

It's a little more complicated than that...

[@coldwarrior1137]

I would be willing to die, to watch that up close. But the process is far too fast for my pathetic mortal brain to see and I would just be vaporized instantly.