Re: So here's a thought:
One of the explanations (in the article) of the 3 years' of X rays is the creation of a 3rd neutron star. In short, they're suggesting that, like a nuclear reaction, on a macro scale the neutron stars collided to form a "massive unstable star-particle" which then "fissioned" into multiple parts...
I can see that reading of it, but I am almost sure that's not what they are saying. The proposed 3rd neutron star is the thing that results from the collision of the first two. Really, in such a collision the result is either going to be a neutron star or a black hole: which you get depends on the masses of the colliding neutron stars, how much mass they shed during the collision, and finally the characteristics ('equation of state') of the stuff neutron stars are made from, which they describe as 'poorly understood' which I think is an understatement to put it fairly mildly.
Depending on whether the resulting object is a black hole or a neutron star the amount of energy which gets injected into the various crud which gets flung off as jets, varies – I think neutron stars can inject more energy as they spin down. So, since they've seen emissions for longer than they expected, one possibility is that the central object is indeed a neutron star and not a black hole, and this would be interesting because it would tell us things about neutron stars I think.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
