What happens if a stellar remnant is too massive to be a neutron star, but not massive enough to become a black hole? The result is a Strange Quark Star. Strange because the Quarks all get converted to a type called strange-quarks.
Quark stars might actually be larger than their neutron star cousins. This size versus mass may be one of the things that will give away a Quark (strange) Star.
Quark star may have enough gravitational energy to start ‘burning’ strange matter. This burning of strange matter may allow the quark (strange) stars to be stable for approximately 10 million years
The electroweak star core would be as big as an apple, but as massive as two Earths.
Saving the best till last, the electroweak star’s core would therefore be as extreme as the universe was only 10-10 seconds (that’s 0.0000000001 seconds) after the Big Bang. These extreme objects would be like mini-Big Bang laboratories, maintaining a pressure where the electromagnetic and weak forces are so intertwined, they cannot be distinguished.
I know you do not know that I like astronomy considerably and am not afraid to pull up theories of my very own. It’s part of what I love about astronomy; you get the freedom to do stuff that may be impossible in other fields.
Well If these stars existed in the very early universe. My theory/contention is that the universal constants were not stable in the very early universe and thus any stars that survived this period could have some interesting remains of that time the we can not find elsewhere. To put this in perspective, there could be strange particles that no longer can survive in our universe–and thus materials that impossible to create here (I’m assuming CERN will not be able to do it). Also there may be unusual linkages to our universe or other universes. Finally, there may even be strange things like strings trapped in there or connected to them. While my theory depends on a black hole, I realise that light and energy can escape a quark star, so it is possible that a quark star will not be able to maintain a separation from our own universe and thus one might expect that it can not act as a store-house of physics and particles that existed in the early universe.
I don’t worry about criticizing my own theories, it is not a “what not to do type comment,” rather is a “think through the reasons why or why-not this will support my theory.”
It should also be noted that quark stars that burn their strange matter only last 100 million years and the age of the universe is 13 billion years. thus only quark stars that do not burn their strange matter is applicable in the above theory I would assume.
Further it is assumed that neutron stars can change into quark stars. I assume such quark stars will not be relevant either.
IMNT: Finally, in 2010 I found a theory that seems to prove, using models, that the giant black holes at the centre of our galaxies and other galaxies were formed by the collisions of galaxies in the early universe. When I read this article, I felt it made sense. However that means the above theory of mine has been shot down! and is wrong…
When Galaxies Collide: How the First Super-Massive Black Holes Were Born [IMNT: my theory sinks]: http://bit.ly/96t88x or http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100825131439.htm
☆☆☆End of Article☆☆☆