Could it perhaps be due to charged particles moving at a
high velocity?  How rapidly does the magnetar rotate?

The magnetar rotates significantly slower than it's comparible neutron star.
The magnetism itself originates from a layer about 1/3 into the interior of the star,
which consists of primarily Neutrons, by mass.
(neutrons have a neutral electric charge, don't they?)
Yes, electrically speaking.
However, they do possess a magnetic polarity, similar to that of a proton.

The common example of this is Hydrogen.
1H has a mass of 1, an electric charge of 1, and a magnetic charge of 1.
2H (deuterium) has a mass of 2, an electric charge of 1, and a magnetic charge of 2.
3H (tritium) has a mass of 3, an electric charge of 1, and a magnetic charge of 3.

each atom has only 1 electron.
however, the two isotopes, have a greater magnetic charge than the stable Hydrogen (1H) atom.

For this reason, Hydrogen - in its' ground state (non-ionic), has no net magnetic charge.
where-as, Deuterium and Tritium respond to a magnetic field.
The difference, is about 0.4 Teslas (at 1 atomic radii)

wht is this important?
because, a large mass of neutrons, has no net electric charge.
but it does have a very intense magnetic charge.

Which gives it a great inductance, in the presence of an intense electric field.
like the field presented by the reactions at the core of the star.
This builds up periodically, and "pulses" a magnetic field of immense amplitude.
The resulting flux emits both magnetic pulses, as well as forms of electromagnetic radiation
like gamma rays, and X-rays.

The difference between the magnetar and the more common variations of a neutron star is
is their slower rotational velocity (generally 2x slower rotation than a neutron star of same size)
and their density - they are generally more dense than a neutron star of the same diameter.
This mass, being primarily neutrons, gives them a more intense magnetic field than the neutron star.

any matter that nears such an intense field, will become ionic.
there can be no molecular bonds, nor any solid mass, to speak of.
only ionic dust..... all else disintegrates into ionic dust.

The electrons are stripped off by the intense magnetic field.
They are all drawn to a surface layer on the outer diameter of the star.
attracted to the neutron layer, but can never reach it, because of the density of the star.

There is an intense electric boundary around these stars, but it's field does not reach to any distance, because it is overpowered by the magnetic field.

The slow rotation does not "cause" the magnetic field, but rather, the intense magnetic field "causes" the star to rotate more slowly.

When you think of quarks as being of two equal but opposite entities.
one magnetic, one electric
simultaneously being attracted to, and repelled from one another, at opposite ends.
like a magnet and a coil

when you combine 3 magnetic quarks, two ups and a down per say..
you have a neutron

when you combine 2 magnetic quarks and an electric quark, two ups and a down
you have a proton, 1/3 less magnetic moment, but an electric charge, 1/3 of the intensity of the magnetic moment.
when the electron is present, to create its' magnetic moment, around a single orbit:
the magnetic moment is comparable to that of a neutron.

you could call a neutron "paramagnetic"
and a proton "ferromagnetic".

Which is true, even on the macro scale.
As evident, by magnetizing "non-magnetic" materials, such as Styrofoam, plastics, wood and aluminum.
This is only possible, under very intense magnetic fields.

oddly enough, this relates back to Ed Leedskalnin, through his device known as the "perpetual motion holder"
Which can create such intense magnetic fields, so as to magnetize non-magnetic materials.
This was discovered by David Lambright back in 2010
Also, can be used the newer 2T+ neo magnets.
or an equivalently intense electric field.

Miles
your starting to look like a three day old Omelet [egg on face]

trying to fit all of this Resonance into one Box  .. just won't go well for you ,never mind looking both ways before you cross the street [or open your mouth with authority]
here there is no limit to the ways you need to look !!
and having to cover all your ignorant rants and rude assumptions from days gone by will surely end up with you pulling a Muscle ,or worse !!

you'll get hobbled and not be able to make it back up MileHigh Mountain !!
maybe only Fiffty feet ?

then they would call you Fiddy...

Please Go ask the Oracle for a bump up ...

Oh no you dont MH-->get it right.
I clearly said !maintain same brightness!--not make the LED brighter.

I will answer your question in 4 to 8 weeks,in the hope that it gives you enough time to use your own smart's,and work it out for your self.

Now--have you any thoughts on what the magnetic force is yet?


Brad

Yes, that's actually what I meant.  If the LED is going to dim as the battery voltage drops, then "making the LED brighter" will indeed maintain the same brightness.

Now we are talking real electronics, and I am asking you to back up your statement with a proper explanation discussing the electronics of the Joule Thief.  This is not the time for games, this is your claim - you stated this, and you need to explain how and why lowering the base resistance in a standard Joule Thief will maintain the brightness of the LED as the battery voltage drops.

I am not interested in talking about the "magnetic force," I want to hear you back up your claim and prove that you are supposedly correct by discussing how the Joule Thief operates and how lowering the base resistance will do what you claim it will do.

MileHigh

Will you stop this foolishness right now?  This is the third or fourth time you have done it, and it's enough.

Brad:

We are discussing the Joule Thief and your claim about the variable base resistor.  I am asking you to back up your statement with a proper explanation discussing the electronics of the Joule Thief and how it operates.  This is your claim - you stated this, and you need to explain how and why lowering the base resistance in a standard Joule Thief will maintain the brightness of the LED as the battery voltage drops.

I want to read your argument and see you make a solid technical case by discussing how the Joule Thief operates and how lowering the base resistance will do what you claim it will do.

MileHigh

I am happy to discuss/debate the question at hand,and we can have this discussion/debate the very way you like it MH,where i make a statement/claim,provide no input toward that statement/claim,and i present the answer in 4 to 8 week's, in the hope that it gives you time to think about it,and try to understand what really happen's. I mean,it is no different to that of what you have done. You made a claim that we are all wrong about what resonance is,and how the resonant frequency is determined in a wine glass--you want to debate the subject,but provide no input toward it,and we are to wait 4 to 8 weeks before you post the holy grail on resonance--in the hope that we have enough time to !!get it right!!.

The answer i provide can only be given once you have educated us on what resonance truly is . I mean,it makes sense -dosnt it?. How could i provide an answer to you when i have no idea as to what resonance is,and will only truly understand it once you have provided all the information we all need on resonance. Anything i say will be incorrect-will it not?,as you have not yet provided your rock solid determination on what resonance is. Once i have your holy grail on resonance,i can then say i will provide my answer in 4 to 8 week's. This will give me enough time to think about it,and have a quick 20 minute googlegasm, and present my wonderful findings that will change the course of history .

 But in the mean time,i demand that we have a debate on the subject at hand,where i let you provide all the input toward that debate,and i just sit back and say--no no,that is incorrect,knowing that i have 4 to 8 weeks to come up with some 'n'bull answer that has already been covered,but just worded in a way so as it sounds completely different.

So lets not dive into fact's and actualities MH, lets wait until i have your answer on what resonance truly is,and then i can take a few weeks to puddle some words together that fit into your new discovery on resonance. But in the mean time,feel free to post some accurate answer's,so as i have something to dismiss as bullshit


Brad

Brad:

Have you ever heard the expression, "Do stupid things, win stupid prizes?"  Your stupid prize is the four to eight week delay, which gives you or anybody else the opportunity to research and answer the two simple questions because you did a stupid thing and therefore you won a stupid prize.

i make a statement/claim,provide no input toward that statement/claim

Who says that whenever you try to reply to a question and you don't get it right that you have to be given input on your reply?  In essence you want hints, you can't deal with simply getting the answer wrong.  It's a request for spoon-feeding.  Do you think life is like this such that whenever you get something wrong that somebody is immediately supposed to guide you towards the right answer?  You have the entire Internet and your own intellect to guide yourself towards the right answer.  And if you don't get it you will be given the right answers in the end.

How could i provide an answer to you when i have no idea as to what resonance is

Who said there is any connection between the variable resistor issue and resonance?  Why are you saying that when we know that a standard Joule Thief doesn't resonate?  The simple fact is that there is no connection at all between resonance and your explanation for why lowering the value of the base resistor is supposedly going to increase the brightness of the LED.

It's just more spaghetti and random stream-of-consciousness thinking on your part making a connection when in fact there is no connection.  it's a thought ricochet.  Put your brain in gear and take one step forwards in your thought process, then take another step forward, and learn to think in logical steps and move forward and think in a straight line just like you can walk in a straight line.

So you don't have a logical reason to not discuss your own statement about the variable resistor issue because it has nothing to do with resonance.  I am pretty certain the reason you don't want to discuss it is because you can't.  It's just a silly excuse to avoid dealing with the issue.  So you are just stalling and faking because you don't want to be exposed for this gaffe. If not, then prove me wrong and I will be happy to listen to you make a solid argument discussing the electronics of the standard Joule Thief and how lowering the value of the base resistor for a constant battery voltage will supposedly make the LED brighter.

MileHigh

Brad:

Have you ever heard the expression, "Do stupid things, win stupid prizes?"  Your stupid prize is the four to eight week delay, which gives you or anybody else the opportunity to research and answer the two simple questions because you did a stupid thing and therefore you won a stupid prize.

Who says that whenever you try to reply to a question and you don't get it right that you have to be given input on your reply?  In essence you want hints, you can't deal with simply getting the answer wrong.  It's a request for spoon-feeding.  Do you think life is like this such that whenever you get something wrong that somebody is immediately supposed to guide you towards the right answer?  You have the entire Internet and your own intellect to guide yourself towards the right answer.  And if you don't get it you will be given the right answers in the end.

Who said there is any connection between the variable resistor issue and resonance?  Why are you saying that when we know that a standard Joule Thief doesn't resonate?  The simple fact is that there is no connection at all between resonance and your explanation for why lowering the value of the base resistor is supposedly going to increase the brightness of the LED.

It's just more spaghetti and random stream-of-consciousness thinking on your part making a connection when in fact there is no connection.  it's a thought ricochet.  Put your brain in gear and take one step forwards in your thought process, then take another step forward, and learn to think in logical steps and move forward and think in a straight line just like you can walk in a straight line.

So you don't have a logical reason to not discuss your own statement about the variable resistor issue because it has nothing to do with resonance.  I am pretty certain the reason you don't want to discuss it is because you can't.  It's just a silly excuse to avoid dealing with the issue.  So you are just stalling and faking because you don't want to be exposed for this gaffe. If not, then prove me wrong and I will be happy to listen to you make a solid argument discussing the electronics of the standard Joule Thief and how lowering the value of the base resistor for a constant battery voltage will supposedly make the LED brighter.

MileHigh

Yes-like you MH, I made a statement-a claim.
And like you, I give you 4 to 8 weeks to think about it, and after that time, I will provide you with the correct answer.
I mean, that is how we debate the MH way--isn't it?--that is the way the true meanings and understandings come about?.
Or maybe-like you-I am just wasting time, and being an idiot.

What I mean is-lets not waste time on the VR , and how we can increase the current flowing to the base of the transistor, as we decrease the base resistance ,which switches the transistor on harder and longer, resulting in a pulse width increase, thus maintaining a magnetic field of the same value as the battery voltage drops, which in turn would maintain the current flowing through the LED to be around the same value, resulting in the same light output from the LED--as the battery voltage drops. Even though that is just a quick and brief explanation, lets not worry about that, nore the fact that the ! So called! sweet spot could also be maintained as the battery voltage drops by decreasing the base resistance. Lets not worry about any of that--lets do a MH on this one, and give everyone here time to throw away all they have learned, and wait 4 to 8 weeks for my theory of everythig-where I take a 20 minute googlegasm, and present world changing determinations--this is the MH way.