Did exploding stars help life on Earth to thrive?

[Techne]

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

Heavy elements can be created from lighter elements in stars (read up on nuclear fusion). Heavy elements can also be created from other heavier elements on earth or in stars or elsewhere (read up on fission). Heavy elements can also be created from compounds through various processes e.g. electrolysis.

So no, not all the heavy elements we have now, right here on earth are created in stars. Sure, a few billion years ago there was not a single heavy element anywhere in the universe and all those heavy elements had to have their origin or were created due to fusion in stars. Since then, heavy elements had their origins and were created through various other processes.

 

[copacetic]

Heavy elements can be created from lighter elements in stars (read up on nuclear fusion). Heavy elements can also be created from other heavier elements on earth or in stars or elsewhere (read up on fission). Heavy elements can also be created from compounds through various processes e.g. electrolysis.

So no, not all the heavy elements we have now, right here on earth are created in stars. Sure, a few billion years ago there was not a single heavy element anywhere in the universe and all those heavy elements had to have their origin or were created due to fusion in stars. Since then, heavy elements had their origins and were created through various other processes.

Just for the record, I am fully aware that we can create elements with our technology, I should have been more clear, upon reflection...

I think for all intents and purposes, Sagan's comment is practically true in any reasonable non-nitpicking sense.

 

[Jab]

Except for some of the hydrogen

 

[Techne]

Just for the record, I am fully aware that we can create elements with our technology, I should have been more clear, upon reflection...

I think for all intents and purposes, Sagan's comment is practically true in any reasonable non-nitpicking sense.

Given the facts, Sagan's quote is just nice poetry and not meant to be some sort of true intellectual insight.

 

[copacetic]

Given the facts, Sagan's quote is just nice poetry and not meant to be some sort of true intellectual insight.

It appears to be one of the cornerstones of modern astrophysics, as far as I can tell...

 

[Techne]

It appears to be one of the cornerstones of modern astrophysics, as far as I can tell...

You are kidding right? This: "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." is not a cornerstone of modern astrophysics. It is pure poetry.

The above is not the same as saying "The first atoms of nitrogen, calcium, iron and carbon were made in the interiors of collapsing stars.". The latter is pretty much a cornerstone in astrophysics.

The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pie probably have their origin in some other kind of process on earth. This is not difficult to understand unless you think the first atoms of nitrogen, carbon, oxygen, calcium etc. are the exact same ones that are part your biology right here and now. That would be mistaken and that is why I say Sagan's quote is technically not true and misleading.

 

[mercurial]

Could be that the extra radiation increased the number of mutations, thereby speeding up evolution.

I was thinking the same thing!

 

[SaiyanZ]

You are kidding right? This: "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." is not a cornerstone of modern astrophysics. It is pure poetry.

The above is not the same as saying "The first atoms of nitrogen, calcium, iron and carbon were made in the interiors of collapsing stars.". The latter is pretty much a cornerstone in astrophysics.

The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pie probably have their origin in some other kind of process on earth. This is not difficult to understand unless you think the first atoms of nitrogen, carbon, oxygen, calcium etc. are the exact same ones that are part your biology right here and now. That would be mistaken and that is why I say Sagan's quote is technically not true and misleading.

Those first atoms released by exploding stars are the exact same ones making up our bodies. The actual atoms are the same whether they have combined through other processes to form molecules and broken down again to form the base atom. For example, say two oxygen atoms and one carbon atom are released. They may combine to form carbon dioxide and be broken down into the base atom over and over again but the fact remains that you can't change those first atoms.

The only way to alter/change atoms would be though fusion or fission. Fusion only takes place in the cores of stars and results in heavier elements. We can create fission in our nuclear reactors by splitting heavy elements like uranium. The percentage of the total mass of elements created by fission on earth is almost negligible though.

 

[killadoob]

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

So the big bang theory is also research suggests?

 

[zippy]

So the big bang theory is also research suggests?

Yes, it's why it's called a theory. It cannot be observed or replicated in an experiment. However, the evidence for it is pretty strong.

Ofc, some theories have stronger evidence than others.

 

[Techne]

Those first atoms released by exploding stars are the exact same ones making up our bodies. The actual atoms are the same whether they have combined through other processes to form molecules and broken down again to form the base atom. For example, say two oxygen atoms and one carbon atom are released. They may combine to form carbon dioxide and be broken down into the base atom over and over again but the fact remains that you can't change those first atoms.

The only way to alter/change atoms would be though fusion or fission. Fusion only takes place in the cores of stars and results in heavier elements. We can create fission in our nuclear reactors by splitting heavy elements like uranium. The percentage of the total mass of elements created by fission on earth is almost negligible though.

I disagree. I think the disagreement is probably based on our different views about the concept of "substance" and substantial change. The issues are wide and deep. For now I think we will have to agree to disagree and move along. You are welcome to PM me if you want to discuss this further, it can get very interesting .

 

[boerseun]

I think it is more a case of a close supernova cause the creation of our solar system, rather than just life on Earth.