Yet according to detailed measurements of the relative motions of the surrounding stars, the team reports in an upcoming issue of Astronomy & Astrophysics, that like every neighboring star,
the mass of the magnetar's progenitor must have been at least 40 times greater than the sun's.
Not exact matches
If magnetic monopoles had relatively small
masses, the particles would sap the strength
of magnetars» magnetic fields.
The rapid rotation created by
mass transfer between the two stars appears necessary to generate the ultra-strong magnetic field and then a second
mass transfer phase allows the
magnetar - to - be to slim down sufficiently so that it does not collapse into a black hole at the moment
of its death.
«It is this process
of swapping material that has imparted the unique chemical signature to Westerlund 1 - 5 and allowed the
mass of its companion to shrink to low enough levels that a
magnetar was born instead
of a black hole — a game
of stellar pass - the - parcel with cosmic consequences!»
Magnetars have the
mass of the sun packed into a star the size
of a city and have magnetic fields a hundred trillion times that
of Earth.
The characteristics
of the surrounding stars suggest that although the
magnetar's progenitor probably reached 40 solar
masses at one point, it shed its
mass so quickly that when the star exploded it fell under the 20 - solar -
mass limit, thereby creating a
magnetar instead
of a black hole — and conforming to current theory about stellar evolution.
Magnetars have the
mass of the sun packed into a star the size
of a city and have magnetic fields a hundred trillion times that
of the Earth.
While the brightness
of SN 2017egm and the properties
of the
magnetar that powers it overlap with those
of other superluminous supernovas, the amount
of mass ejected by SN 2017egm may be lower than the average event.
«Several interpretations
of the nature
of this system have been proposed, from an isolated slowly spinning
magnetar with a substantial fossil - disk, to a young low
mass X-ray binary system, or even a binary
magnetar, but none
of them is straightforward, nor can they explain the overall observational properties,» researchers said in a study, published in the Sept. 2, 2016, issue
of The Astrophysical Journal Letters.