Live data from Hacker News

Physicists make most precise measurement of neutron’s lifetime

nature.com

31–40 of 67 posts

Re: Physicists make most precise measurement of neutron’s lifetime

#31
post #18

Here's a question I was always curious to hear a good intuitive explanation for -- Why does a neutron star not decay, as it is composed of neutrons, and free neutrons should decay in 15 minutes? Is it because the neutrons are in an energetic "well" and to decay out would actually require energy? In collapsing under gravity to neutron degeneracy, did the neutrons say, radiate away their ability to decay any more?

This is the best answer I've seen: https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/63387 which to my layman eyes basically seems to match your theory.

I'll pretend I understood what the answer says about there not being enough energy and boldly ask: what if the neutron star is spinning _really_ fast?

Re: Physicists make most precise measurement of neutron’s lifetime

#32

Here's a question I was always curious to hear a good intuitive explanation for -- Why does a neutron star not decay, as it is composed of neutrons, and free neutrons should decay in 15 minutes? Is it because the neutrons are in an energetic "well" and to decay out would actually require energy? In collapsing under gravity to neutron degeneracy, did the neutrons say, radiate away their ability to decay any more?

Well that's the decay rate for a "bare" neutron. Neutrons in atoms obviously last longer than that. And the neutrons in a neutron star are all smashed up next to each other, kinda like a star-sized atom.

Re: Physicists make most precise measurement of neutron’s lifetime

#33
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody knows

is the annoying answer "if it were really that much shorter we probably wouldn't exist"?

It's like how every number n has the factors 1 x n. It's always _an answer_, but never the juicy one.

Re: Physicists make most precise measurement of neutron’s lifetime

#34
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the best answer I've seen: https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/63387 which to my layman eyes basically seems to match your theory.

I'll pretend I understood what the answer says about there not being enough energy and boldly ask: what if the neutron star is spinning _really_ fast?

You are spinning pretty fast on the side of the planet, but you don’t go flying out into space. Same deal, I’d guess as a layman.

Re: Physicists make most precise measurement of neutron’s lifetime

#36
post #29

It seems like the difference in lifetimes demands new physics. If the magnetically trapped neutron lifetimes match Standard Model predictions, then something involved in getting them into the beam must be changing them, or selecting out longer-lived individuals, both of which seem bonkers. There is probably a Nobel for whoever solves this. Capturing some from a beam into a magnetic trap seems like a good start.

As a physics layman my first thought when reading that is special relativity: things happen more slowly (ie. decay) the faster something is moving. Not sure how fast the beams are moving though.

Re: Physicists make most precise measurement of neutron’s lifetime

#37

Here's a question I was always curious to hear a good intuitive explanation for -- Why does a neutron star not decay, as it is composed of neutrons, and free neutrons should decay in 15 minutes? Is it because the neutrons are in an energetic "well" and to decay out would actually require energy? In collapsing under gravity to neutron degeneracy, did the neutrons say, radiate away their ability to decay any more?

It is approximately what you say.

A free neutron decays spontaneously into a proton, electron and neutrino, because decaying provides energy, because the mass of a neutron is higher than the sum of the masses of the decay products.

A free proton does not decay because none of the possible decay modes can produce particles with a lesser mass.

This is the same reason why your body does not fragment spontaneously in separate parts, but some external energy is required for that, e.g. someone wielding a meat cleaver.

The neutrons forming a neutron star are bound together by the gravitational force. When the neutron star has formed, the energy equal to the binding energy has been lost, so the average mass of a neutron in a neutron star, i.e. the mass of the star divided by the number of neutrons, is less than the mass of a free neutron and it is also less than the mass of a free proton and even less than the average mass of a nucleon inside the nucleus with the highest binding energy (iron 56).

Otherwise the star would have remained composed of ordinary nuclei instead of becoming a neutron star.

To extract a free neutron from a neutron star you must provide an energy at least as large as corresponding to the difference in mass between a free neutron and the mass of a neutron bound in the neutron star.

To make it "decay" (of course, that is not decay, because it is not spontaneous) while remaining in the neutron star, you need to provide some lower energy, which could convert a neutron into a proton, electron and neutrino, creating an excited state of the star, like an excited state of a nucleus or atom. Soon after that, the difference in energy will be radiated, either when the proton and electron would recombine again, or the proton will spontaneously decay into a neutron and a positron (which will later annihilate with the electron).

So a neutron star should behave like any other bound system. The state with the lowest energy is the state when all the nucleons are neutrons, unlike the state with the lowest energy of an ordinary nucleus, where a part of the nucleons must be protons.

This being the state with the lowest energy, no decay processes can exist. External energy can produce excited states, where a few protons, electrons and positrons may exist, but these other particles will decay, combine or annihilate, so the base state will be reached again.

The same happens with atomic nuclei, which are bound by strong nuclear forces instead of gravitational forces. The neutrons in stable nuclei or in nuclei with excess protons do not decay. On the contrary, the protons in nuclei with excess protons over the corresponding stable nucleus decay into neutrons and positrons (or they capture electrons).

So a neutron star behaves in the same way as a nucleus where the state with the lowest energy happens to be the one with no protons.

Re: Physicists make most precise measurement of neutron’s lifetime

#39

The question I want answered is not why a neutron takes so long to decay - that seems understandable as it's mitigated by the weak force - but why is that time of ~14.63 minutes the actual time it is? When the W- boson decays into an electron and antineutrino it happens millions of times faster than the life of the neutron itself. What makes that trigger point happen when it does?

All things decay and have half life time. I don't get what's so mysterious about it. Neutrons have some not well understood structure and that structure is unstable in the dangerous waters of quantum turbulence.

Re: Physicists make most precise measurement of neutron’s lifetime

#40
post #39

The question I want answered is not why a neutron takes so long to decay - that seems understandable as it's mitigated by the weak force - but why is that time of ~14.63 minutes the actual time it is? When the W- boson decays into an electron and antineutrino it happens millions of times faster than the life of the neutron itself. What makes that trigger point happen when it does?

All things decay and have half life time. I don't get what's so mysterious about it. Neutrons have some not well understood structure and that structure is unstable in the dangerous waters of quantum turbulence.

Photons don't, for counterexample
Post reply on HN