Submitted 3 hours ago by janus2@lemmy.zip to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://lemmy.zip/pictrs/image/d324ae0d-e499-467f-825e-9b67111aee7b.webp
jabde.com/…/should-neutron-stars-be-added-to-the-…
I say yes, entirely because it’s hilarious
After reading I realised that this proposal isn’t a single new element for all neutron stars, but a separate new entry on the table for every individual neutron star in existence, unless there are two that happen to have the exact same number of protons which is unlikely. Sounds good to me
protons
we have assumed that Rex is comprised of a uniform nucleon fluid, with protons, neutrons and electrons in an idealised 1:8:1 ratio
This is how the author is estimating it, they are assuming 1/9th of the mass is protons. No idea how good that assumption is though, there is a source which doesn’t look the most convincing
Are they elements? 🤨
Shouldn’t they be element 0 as they dont have any protons?
The conversion from protons to neutrons does not complete 100% so there are still some (trillion) protons left per “atom”
Didn’t know that, thanks
Apparently, I am a top. Link to a quiz
Astronomical levels of snark
A representation of a binuclear compound of element 10^(56) with an average bond length of 100 quintillion angstroms.
Okay that was funny.
(not to scale) is my favorite part
Okay this is good
Hum… The width of each row increases exponentially with their number.
It’s probably just some ~1m away from the small elements.
Do they have 0 protons? Because if they do, they should be in the spot above helium
No the ratio of protons neutrons electrons is assumed to be 1:8:1 in the article. It’s a fun read
GraniteM@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
Image
The rare reverse-Saddam.
teft@piefed.social 1 hour ago
The air vent is actually a particle accelerator shooting neutrons into the periodic table.