When atoms lose their electrons (neutron stars), do they lose their elemental identity?

Interesting question, with a complicated answer. Toward the surface the material is thought to be a lattice of nuclei (probably iron) with a free flowing sea of electrons interspersed. Further down there may be free neutrons interspersed as well, so the identity of the elements that form the material is confused. At the innermost depths the material is esssentially a mass of neutrons without any differentiation of "atoms," and hence no elemental identity. Strange stuff indeed.

Thanks.
Are the protons converted to neutrons?

Thanks.
Are the protons converted to neutrons?

Yes - the electrons are essentially mashed into the protons, resulting in neutrons. Hence the name "neutron star."

Yes - the electrons are essentially mashed into the protons, resulting in neutrons. Hence the name "neutron star."

Since they are no longer electrons, the only other thing neutron stars have is heat from its collapse (temperature). Therefore the light we see are other electrons entering the heat, around the star where the heat is the catalyst for transition in the atoms gravitating toward the star.

I thought I remembering hearing the Mass of a teaspoon of Neutron Star would weigh 100 Million Tons, Can anyone explain?

I thought i remembering hearing the Mass of a teaspoon of Neutron Star would weigh 100 Million Tons, Can anyone explain?
Acceleration due to gravity at the surface of Earth (9.8m/s^2) the mass with that volume will weigh that much. Since most of the space has been squeezed and the electrons have been converted to neutrons, the resulting mass is very dense.

I thought i remembering hearing the Mass of a teaspoon of Neutron Star would weigh 100 Million Tons, Can anyone explain?

In a neutron star there is none of the empty space that normally exists in atoms between the neucleus and electrons. So the density of each atom is incredibly high - in the range of 5 x 10^17 Kg/m^3 (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_star ). That's equivalent to about 9 billion tons per cubic inch.

If you were to place that on Earth and the weight remained the same, therotically would it ocillate bak and forth through the Earth and tend to settle in the center, and would center of the earth melt it as it passes through, I imagine the heat it would generate would be great in it self(the friction moving through Earth)?

Interesting question Stratman. I think you're basically correct - rock is not strong enough to hold up a cubic inch of this material, so it would sink like a stone in water. And yes - it would eventually settle at the center of the earth (which is already molten). Here's an interesting calculation: the change in gravitational potential energy of the 1 cubic inch mass as it sinks 1 meter into the earth's surface is


\Delta PE = mg \Delta h = 8.2 \times 10^{12} Kg \ \times \ 9.8 m/s^2 \times \ 1\ m = 8 \times 10^{13} \ Nm = 2.2 \times 10^7 \ Kilowatt-Hours.

That's an awful lot of energy (and resulting heat) as it plows its way downward!

Not just iron, and the sea of electrons is not relevant here.

There is a limit, the limit of weak interactive force. This force works at a certain distance . If the distance of two interacting particles is lesser than the threshold, it breaks down, giving way to other forces. In a neutron star, the gravity causes the nuclei to push against each other, pushing the outer electron shells closer to the nucleus. Thereby, the weak force gives way to first electromagnetic whereby ellectrons collide with protons, creating nuetrons and a neutrino, and then gradually to the strong interaction force, whereby the neutrons clump together.

not just iron, and the sea of electrons is not relevant here.

There is a limit, the limit of weak interactive force. This force works at a certain distance . If the distance of two interacting particles is lesser than the threshold, it breaks down, giving way to other forces. In a neutron star, the gravity causes the the nuclei to push against each other, pushing the outer electron shells closer to the nucleus. Thereby, the weak force gives way to first electromagnetic whereby ellectrons collide with protons, creating nuetrons and a neutrino, and then gradually to the strong interaction force, whereby the neutrons clump together.
Does this also mean no light is emittrf from neutron stars because they have no electrons, only those impacting the mass from outside?

Since they are no longer electrons, the only other thing neutron stars have is heat from its collapse (temperature). Therefore the light we see are other electrons entering the heat, around the star where the heat is the catalyst for transition in the atoms gravitating toward the star.

What I thought. Extending that to black-holes, then BHs may be gigantic masses (like neutron stars) not singularities. In that case they are black because they lack electrons and the event-horizon are the stimulated electrons (from its heat) as atoms impacting the mass.