Did exploding stars help life on Earth to thrive?

Techne

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
12,851
From the Royal Astronomical Society:
Did exploding stars help life on Earth to thrive?

Research by a Danish physicist suggests that the explosion of massive stars – supernovae – near the Solar System has strongly influenced the development of life. Prof. Henrik Svensmark of the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) sets out his novel work in a paper in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

When the most massive stars exhaust their available fuel and reach the end of their lives, they explode as supernovae, tremendously powerful explosions that are briefly brighter than an entire galaxy of normal stars. The remnants of these dramatic events also release vast numbers of high-energy charged particles known as galactic cosmic rays (GCR). If a supernova is close enough to the Solar System, the enhanced GCR levels can have a direct impact on the atmosphere of the Earth.
Prof. Svensmark looked back through 500 million years of geological and astronomical data and considered the proximity of the Sun to supernovae as it moves around our Galaxy, the Milky Way. In particular, when the Sun is passing through the spiral arms of the Milky Way, it encounters newly forming clusters of stars. These so-called open clusters, which disperse over time, have a range of ages and sizes and will have started with a small proportion of stars massive enough to explode as supernovae. From the data on open clusters, Prof. Svensmark was able to deduce how the rate at which supernovae exploded near the Solar System varied over time.
Comparing this with the geological record, he found that the changing frequency of nearby supernovae seems to have strongly shaped the conditions for life on Earth. Whenever the Sun and its planets have visited regions of enhanced star formation in the Milky Way Galaxy, where exploding stars are most common, life has prospered. Prof. Svensmark remarks in the paper, "The biosphere seems to contain a reflection of the sky, in that the evolution of life mirrors the evolution of the Galaxy."

Like Carl Sagan said: "The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff."

Here is the published article:
Evidence of nearby supernovae affecting life on Earth
 

mercurial

MyBB Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
40,902
You quote us an article from a website called ras.org.uk? :p

Interesting article.
 
P

Picard

Guest
Like Carl Sagan said: "The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff."

Carl Sagan is the kind of guy that would take a finished built set of LEGO, break it down and only then marvel at the pieces.
 

copacetic

King of the Hippies
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
57,908
Carl Sagan is the kind of guy that would take a finished built set of LEGO, break it down and only then marvel at the pieces.

Can you elaborate on this statement? What do you mean, exactly?
 

killadoob

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
46,571
Geez how can anyone claim to know how life started, we cannot even get to the moon easily yet we know how life and the universe started. Seems logical i guess.

About as logical as the earth being flat :p
 

Elimentals

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
10,819
Busy downloading so will read paper later.

One thing that doesnt make sense is that he states that supernova's affected life on earth, I guess he is only referring to the light aspect and not the dust from said explosions.

To put it perspective, If something happens on the sun, it takes 8 minutes after the fact for that light to reach earth and days for shock-waves to reach us, then there is the aspect of particles that can take months to years to finally get here. Now when we look at a supernova around the corner say very conservative 8 light years, it can take the light 8 years to get here now how long to you think it will take for the shockwaves and particles to get here?

To be able to track that in relation to evolution just becomes a guessing game at best if you ask me, esp if you look at the date stamps of some of evolution's major changes like say the Cambridge explosion that we can not even pinpoint with precision, and use 3 to 5 million years as an offset.

Anyway like I said will read it later and thanx for sharing.
 

zippy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
10,321
Geez how can anyone claim to know how life started, we cannot even get to the moon easily yet we know how life and the universe started. Seems logical i guess.

About as logical as the earth being flat :p

They aren't "claiming" anything. Note the use of the words "research suggests"
 

zippy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
10,321
Busy downloading so will read paper later.

One thing that doesnt make sense is that he states that supernova's affected life on earth, I guess he is only referring to the light aspect and not the dust from said explosions.

To put it perspective, If something happens on the sun, it takes 8 minutes after the fact for that light to reach earth and days for shock-waves to reach us, then there is the aspect of particles that can take months to years to finally get here. Now when we look at a supernova around the corner say very conservative 8 light years, it can take the light 8 years to get here now how long to you think it will take for the shockwaves and particles to get here?

To be able to track that in relation to evolution just becomes a guessing game at best if you ask me, esp if you look at the date stamps of some of evolution's major changes like say the Cambridge explosion that we can not even pinpoint with precision, and use 3 to 5 million years as an offset.

Anyway like I said will read it later and thanx for sharing.

Wouldn't the remnants of a supernova that close be all around us. We are in a pretty dull part of the galaxy. It takes far longer than 3 or 5 million years for the remnants of a supernova to dissipate

Our sun effectively shields us from much of the radiation originating from outside of the solar system. This has been confirmed by the voyager spacecraft.

In my view the elements needed for life where already in the solar system. Just needed the right conditions.

Ofc, I could be wrong :)
 

SaiyanZ

Executive Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
8,136
Could be that the extra radiation increased the number of mutations, thereby speeding up evolution.
 

Elimentals

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
10,819
Could be that the extra radiation increased the number of mutations, thereby speeding up evolution.

Thats what I am thinking, the paper does link it pretty closely with evolution/mutations on earth and this is about the best conclusion I can jump to. Did not read the full paper yet but its interesting how they got their numbers I must say.
 

Techne

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
12,851
Carl Sagan is the kind of guy that would take a finished built set of LEGO, break it down and only then marvel at the pieces.
Since this article deals with the possible influence of astronomical cosmic rays or galactic cosmic rays on the evolution of life on earth I thought that quote by Sagan was quite apt since he was a famous astronomer, even though it is technically not the whole truth and actually quite misleading.

Thats what I am thinking, the paper does link it pretty closely with evolution/mutations on earth and this is about the best conclusion I can jump to. Did not read the full paper yet but its interesting how they got their numbers I must say.

The paper links the activity of supernovae and the formation of galactic cosmic rays to climatic changes as well as changes in biodiversity on earth. While correlation does not imply causation, these links sure look interesting.
 

Elimentals

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
10,819
The paper links the activity of supernovae and the formation of galactic cosmic rays to climatic changes as well as changes in biodiversity on earth. While correlation does not imply causation, these links sure look interesting.

Agreed, and like normal I do form my own conclusions based on what I know before reading, but change it as data gets absorbed.

I just wish I was like you people that can read something like that in one go. For me its a case of grab 2 head ache tablets and work through one page and then take a break about an hour later.
 

copacetic

King of the Hippies
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
57,908
Since this article deals with the possible influence of astronomical cosmic rays or galactic cosmic rays on the evolution of life on earth I thought that quote by Sagan was quite apt since he was a famous astronomer, even though it is technically not the whole truth and actually quite misleading.

Misleading how?

I thought the heavier elements were all made from exploding stars? Although, my knowledge in this regard is elementary at best.
 

w1z4rd

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
49,747
Carl Sagan is the kind of guy that would take a finished built set of LEGO, break it down and only then marvel at the pieces.

What a false statement. Dont put false words into someone elses mouth. Makes you appear dishonest.

[video=youtube;zSgiXGELjbc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSgiXGELjbc[/video]

He seemed to have a better understanding of the bigger picture than most people.
 

Techne

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
12,851
Misleading how?

I thought the heavier elements were all made from exploding stars? Although, my knowledge in this regard is elementary at best.
Sagan's quote is just a cute way of trying to convey how astrophysics and biology are linked. It is not meant to be taken literally true, otherwise it is misleading. It is much more complex than that. You are not made up of star stuff now, when you exist here and now. Sure, some of the stuff that are part of your biology had their origins in stars, but that does not imply that you are made of star stuff here and now. The quote is more poetic than anything else and shouldn't be confused for having any real philosophical or empirical insight ;).
 

copacetic

King of the Hippies
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
57,908
Sagan's quote is just a cute way of trying to convey how astrophysics and biology are linked. It is not meant to be taken literally true, otherwise it is misleading. It is much more complex than that. You are not made up of star stuff now, when you exist here and now. Sure, some of the stuff that are part of your biology had their origins in stars, but that does not imply that you are made of star stuff here and now. The quote is more poetic than anything else and shouldn't be confused for having any real philosophical or empirical insight ;).

So all the heavier elements were not created in stars, is what you are saying?

I'm not arguing, this is just what I've generally understood to be the case.
 

w1z4rd

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
49,747
So all the heavier elements were not created in stars, is what you are saying?

I'm not arguing, this is just what I've generally understood to be the case.
That is pretty much the case. The heavier the element, the denser the star. This is true for most elements except for a few man made ones.
 
Top