Magnetism in binary systems

[PB666]

http://phys.org/news/2015-09-mysterious-massive-magnetic-stars.html

[RainDreamer]

So...can anyone explain to me what this means? Binary star systems are inherently unstable?

[PB666]

I think that binaries that are close togethr are unstable for a large number of reasons.

[YNM]

Maybe quite the reason why massive contact binary aren't observed as many as less massive contact binary. Look up W UMa binary.

[AngelLestat]

The only thing clear that I have from that study is: "we still dont have any clue"

We are far to know how magnetic fields act and form in stars, then knowing the interaction between 2 (very close) stars it makes everything a lot more complex, besides not all stars are equal, for an equal size we might see very different magnetic behaviors.

Then in case there is a force that slow down both stars, they said long term... in cosmology that usually means billions of years, and only in very close systems.

So I guess this is more a guest or assumption from something that they still not understand.

[PB666]

The only thing clear that I have from that study is: "we still dont have any clue"

We are far to know how magnetic fields act and form in stars, then knowing the interaction between 2 (very close) stars it makes everything a lot more complex, besides not all stars are equal, for an equal size we might see very different magnetic behaviors.

Then in case there is a force that slow down both stars, they said long term... in cosmology that usually means billions of years, and only in very close systems.

So I guess this is more a guest or assumption from something that they still not understand.

Dynamos have multiple origins. A star that formed because of a suppernova of a carbon/iron rich star might have stronger magnetic feild than a generation 1 star. I think the major issue is field strength and proximity. If the field strength id high and proximity is close then.

what seems more strange to me is why close binaries form in the first place, but then drak matter may be part of the problem. As dust and hydrogen aggregate drag should orbitally degrade velocity and proximal densities should collapse around a point mass, leaving trivial amounts of mass to form the planets. It is plausible that the magnetic core prexisted the star nucleation event, and nucleation occurs as a magnetic process. The PROBLEM is that turbulation in a star should destroy most solid masses, so if magnetism is humongous then maybe solid cores persist throughout the whole process.

I wonder how many times a new star has been built on a neutron star?