Also, extra from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StrangeletNeed to wait to see the results of the investigation into neutron stars I guess.
DangersIf the strange matter hypothesis is correct and a stable negatively-charged strangelet with a surface tension larger than the aforementioned critical value exists, then a larger strangelet would be more stable than a smaller one. One speculation that has resulted from the idea is that a strangelet coming into contact with a lump of ordinary matter could convert the ordinary matter to strange matter.[15][16] This "ice-nine"-like disaster scenario is as follows: one strangelet hits a nucleus, catalyzing its immediate conversion to strange matter. This liberates energy, producing a larger, more stable strangelet, which in turn hits another nucleus, catalyzing its conversion to strange matter. In the end, all the nuclei of all the atoms of Earth are converted, and Earth is reduced to a hot, large lump of strange matter.
T
his is not a concern for strangelets in cosmic rays because they are produced far from Earth and have had time to decay to their ground state, which is predicted by most models to be positively charged, so they are electrostatically repelled by nuclei, and would rarely merge with them.[17][18] But high-energy collisions could produce negatively charged strangelet states which live long enough to interact with the nuclei of ordinary matter.[19]
The danger of catalyzed conversion by strangelets produced in heavy-ion colliders has received some media attention,[20][21] and concerns of this type were raised[15][22] at the commencement of the RHIC experiment at Brookhaven, which could potentially have created strangelets. A detailed analysis[16] concluded that the RHIC collisions were comparable to ones which naturally occur as cosmic rays traverse the solar system, so we would already have seen such a disaster if it were possible. RHIC has been operating since 2000 without incident. Similar concerns have been raised about the operation of the LHC at CERN[23]
but such fears are dismissed as far-fetched by scientists.[23][24][25]
In the case of a neutron star, the conversion scenario seems much more plausible. A neutron star is in a sense a giant nucleus (20 km across), held together by gravity, but it is electrically neutral and so does not electrostatically repel strangelets. If a strangelet hit a neutron star, it could convert a small region of it, and that region would grow to consume the entire star, creating a quark star.[26]
Debate about the strange matter hypothesisThe strange matter hypothesis remains unproven. No direct search for strangelets in cosmic rays or particle accelerators has seen a strangelet (see references in earlier sections). If any of the objects such as neutron stars could be shown to have a surface made of strange matter, this would indicate that strange matter is stable at zero pressure, which would vindicate the strange matter hypothesis. However there is no strong evidence for strange matter surfaces on neutron stars (see below).
Another argument against the hypothesis is that if it were true, all neutron stars should be made of strange matter, and otherwise none should be.[27] Even if there were only a few strange stars initially, violent events such as collisions would soon create many strangelets flying around the universe. Because a single strangelet will convert a neutron star to strange matter, by now all neutron stars would have been converted. This argument is still debated,[28][29][30][31] but if it is correct then showing that one neutron star has a conventional nuclear matter crust would disprove the strange matter hypothesis.
Because of its importance for the strange matter hypothesis, there is an ongoing effort to determine whether the surfaces of neutron stars are made of strange matter or nuclear matter. The evidence currently favors nuclear matter. This comes from the phenomenology of X-ray bursts, which is well explained in terms of a nuclear matter crust,[32] and from measurement of seismic vibrations in magnetars.[33]