I love these short videos they tell more in 6 minutes than the expensive discovery or natgeo or nova documentaries do in 1hour thank guys you guys should get the budget like discovery channel has.
@Medic1911 u dont understand all stars explode at the end , after the explosion ..what is left is a white dwarf ...lots of new elements are sent away from the star after the explosion ..but the white dwarf is left very compressed ...to the point of collapse if the white dwarf gets the chance to attract new matter ...it will get more mass until it collapses in on itself ..and becomes a black hole.
2:55 I think you should've used "disastrous" there, not only to break up the use of "catastrophic", but also to share an inside joke with the people who know the root of the word.
I think i've spotted an error. At 2:00 the professor says "in more massive stars Helium is fused", after he's already talked about the Sun becoming a white dwarf. As a white dwarf is a Carbon-Oxygen core Helium has already been fused. You don't need a big star to fuse Helium, only Carbon-Oxygen+
It's interesting that this popped up in my suggested youtube so many years later and if anyone is at the helm, you should update the description with a link to one of the many video that explains killonovas are responsible for the most of the heavy elements, not just supernova which is incapable of producing the ratio of heavy elements alone.
One question i have always wondered about... We have about 90 elements naturally occurring, and through this theory I would say that the fusions would produce elements with doubled atomic numbers or at least even numbers like 1-2-6-12.... I personally don't believe that in order to get a lithium atom, a hydrogen and a helium atoms would fuse, simply because the physical conditions required differ between the 2 types. Thank you for a wonderful but extremely brief clip!
For that example, that would make sense. I just looked up 118 and took it's half life. Most of the more massive elements are much less stable and wouldn't have that super long half-life. I think I missed that your comment essentially had two discrete parts and thought you meant the elements beyond 118 might be in our crust. Plutonium and such... yeah, definitely, just not in significant enough amounts to use (I'd assume). Man-made pretty much just means we haven't discovered them naturally.
@kipras121 Well from the information I got; Betelgeuse is about 520 light years away. If that sounds far, our galaxy is about 100,000 across. Betelgeuse is also expected to explode as a type II supernova so I'd like to think that we could see it as a small fixed object in the sky from where we are, although it would probably take a really long time to look like anything that really stands out. Even the lowest powered telescopes will have a great view though
When a star explodes it sends its remnants across the galaxy, as said in the video. That's a lot of remnants. These remnants can be gravitationally pulled in again, and become part of an accretion disk in another star, where things like planets are formed. This is my best guess, for now.
@sbergman27 I think I can answer this. The collapse of the core causes an implosion, sending a shockwave through the outer layers. Those outer layers are still made off lighter elements and the pressure from that shockwave causes them to fuse at much higher rate than normal (pressure generated by gravity), which in term generates even more pressure; setting off a chain reaction. So the star basically explodes.
I think the answer here likes in a misconception about radioactive decay. Something is ALWAYS emitted, never absorbed, now whether that is a proton or an electron or whatever varies. In this case, an electron is emitted from a neutron, and the lack of the negative charge of that electron turns it into a proton, turning uranium into the higher atomic number plutonium. Radioactive elements follow very specific, predictable pathways down to stable elements using these different types of decay.
They spin before they collapse, and since the diameter decreases dramatically, but the angular momentum is the same; like an ice skater tucking in her arms the rate of rotation increases.
So accepting these explanations, other Suns would have had to blown up before our solar system formed. Also the heavier ones would have to migrate around and for some reason we only got **some** of the nova stuff in one spot. It almost makes more sense for like unstable stars to explode before forming our star all within our solar system, or that our sun somehow expelled the material on start up...
FYI the theory for the formation of elements heavier than iron has now changed somewhat. They now believe that a large amount (it may be the majority but I can’t remember off the top of my head) of elements heavier than iron are formed in neutron star mergers
Great video. Nice view of the books you've got there. In case anyone's interested, an interesting read on this exact subject is Radiogenic Isotope Geology(Cambridge Press), it can be read freely on the internet.
One thing I've always wondered is that along with the gravitational ricochet of the star's collapse, wouldn't the fact that a large percentage of the star's mass is undergoing heavy fusion also contribute a tremendous amount of force to the supernova, if not more force than the gravitational collapse?
I heard recently that when a star goes super nova the heavier elements are the ones that go the farthest away from the center. The star basically gets ripped inside out
oh and another question: the photograph from the supernovae is made from a composition of xrays, infrared and can't remember. Does that mean that if we were to witness in space with our eyes a supernovae explosion then we won't see any color will we? Only light from the energy but then no color? I wonder what we would actually see?
@Neutrinoghost: In stellar core temperatures exceeding a hundred million degrees K or so, multiple helium-4 nuclei can be fused to form carbon, oxygen, and so forth. Wiki "triple-alpha process" for more information regarding the subject.
A plain mention to Cecilia Payne (who discovered the actual chemical composition of stars) would have been very adecuated in the introduction of the subject.
I just wanted to add that it's not rubber balls we're playing with here, to say that 2+1=3 and thus, a hydrogen and a helium would produce lithium. There are parameters and physical properties that are different, the temperature and pressure needed to overcome the strong forces of the nuclei of both types differ, when the helium atoms are ready to fuses, theoretically, all hydrogen atoms should have already fused... That is simply my point....
The periodic table lists 118 elements as of Feb, 2017. I think what you are asking is if there is an undiscovered element or elements with 119 or more protons. I think the answers is "unlikely". Anything with 119 or more protons probably has to be synthesized by man.
Random question... Are light years measured from our view point, or if we were travelling at the speed of light? Because time passes differently at that speed
Well, the bigger it is, the less stable it is and the faster it decays. Most of the elements that are at the end of the periodic table have incredible short half-lives, for example ununoctium (what 118 is called right now) has a half life of less than a millisecond. So the small amounts of more massive elements quickly decay and don't get a chance to do anything, but theoretically you're probably right, except (probably) for the in the crust thing.
So... How did the Earth get all these heavy elements like Gold, etc. via Meteor/Comet/Asteroid? I mean, I live on the earth, and we have most of the possible elements (some don't naturally occur, I hear), but the Earth wasn't once upon a time a supernova, was it? Where did Gold come from as far as the earth is concerned?
Refined: Pauli explusion principle tells us that stars of 1.4 solar masses or higher gives us a neutron star (Chandrasehkar limit), which might be pulsars. It's estimated that stars of ~3 solar masses will turn into a stellar black hole. Not to be confused with primordial and supermassive black holes, th latter of which have been observed to ahve 18billion stellar masses.
Planets are formed from Nebula. The nebula that existed before the formation of the earth may have been a remnant of a supernova explosion or could have contained remnants of a supernova explosion.
Dear Supernova... Thank you for fixing a problem the universe nearly cursed us with. For we wouldn't exist if you didn't convert hydrogen and helium into other elements.
@Aviatorsmith no it is hypothesised that matter existed in a different state before the big bang and expanded at the time of the universes birth. Also pretty sure there are 11 dimensions currently believed to exist. It is impossible to measure anything from before the big bang and that is why time is considered to have started then
"Matter is just another part of the spectrum at various wavelengths wound-up into antimatter over matter within the active cores of galaxies! The Inward spherical waves multiplying time dilation at right-angle's relative to the surrounding masses are compressing the wave-amplitude and cannot escape the singularity we call the atoms wound-up into antimatter over matter in violent motion simulating rest and balance now through violent motion by the inward absorption and outward emission of EMR."
So where do all the neutrons in the "metal" elements (Li - Fe and up) come from? Isn't the proportion of deuterium or tritium pretty low? Are neutrons formed in the cores of stars by some sort of electron/proton fusion process?
It makes sense, the key word is "about". Obviously if it was exactly 75% and 1/4 it would equal 100%. But he meant that about 75% is Hydrogen, about 25% is Helium, and then everything else is about 2%. So it could be 73% Hydrogen, 25% Helium, 2% everything else, or 74% Hydrogen, 24% Helium, 2% everything else, or something like that.
Neutrons were effectively cooked up in the big bang, and since they are unstable, had to bond with a proton to keep from undergoing beta decay. I would imagine that your electron/proton fusion process hypothesis would be correct, since all you need to make a neutron is to fuse it with an electron.
So. Given enough neutrons, anything is possible. Imagine if you will, a rapidly spinning neutron star - where the centrifugal force and neutron degeneracy pressure hold it above the Swarzchild radius. It is spinning and losing energy. Until KER-POP - it drops below the Swarzchild radius and becomes a black hole. It could produce a significant gamma ray burst...
i dont question your abilities, but the "bullet speed test" was the pure action in comparison to this. interesting would be the device that makes the alpha particles "visible" by condensation or ionisation.
@kipras121 We detect supernova almost on a daily basis so those odds of having one close enough to get a great look at sound pretty good to me, but the chance of it happening in the next 50 years is the same for that of 100, or 200 years, there's just no way of telling when. There are a couple stars out there now that we're monitoring daily for activity. Namely, the star Betelgeuse in the constellation Orion which is over 1000 solar masses
Yes, because as said in this video, continuous nuclear fusion with iron as fuel is unattainable. Any star that is bigger than about 8 solar masses when the hydrogen in its core runs out, will develop an iron core and go supernova.
What about Lithium and Beryllium? He said in this video Carbon up to Iron are made in the core of the star, but he doesn't say how Lithium and Beryllium are made
@sidewaysfcs0718 if i stand correct, it is the bigger starts that collapse into black holes, correct? Why is it that they don't explode? I understand the force of gravity is higher due to the higher mass, but from the video I got the thought of Newtons law in my head. So why is it that the bigger stars dont have an opposite but equal force exerted thus a bigger explosion?
but if there was lot's of matter around, the heavier matter would be pulled to the center more, right? Which means it would go to where the sun would be in a future solar system, which means we on earth should have a much smaller portion of the heavy elements than the sun. Right?
Sorry, misread Neutrinoghost's statement. I thought he was claiming that fusion of the heavier elements could occur regardless of core temperature and mass. Disregard my post. ^^
One thing that I think about from time to time is if solar systems for out of a disc of gas and debris, wouldn't the lighter elements float to the outer edge of the disc? How does all the hydrogen and helium get to the middle?
Nabre Labre Well, hydrogen and helium are by far the most common elements in the solar system. They alone make more than 99.9% of the total mass of the solar system, and the rest of matter is just chunks of rocks that float around. What should have happened is that some disturbance to the cloud would make the gas to accumulate in some place, and as it accumulated, its gravitational effect made even more gas to accumulate there, so what's outside of the sun is just the matter that had the right speed to start orbiting it instead of falling inside.
well, i believe they may exist in real massive stars, with extraordinary internal pressure than could induce the fusion of much heavier elements to produce the synthetic heavy elements, this is not observed through the wavelength-sensitive telescopes that gives a brief on a star ingredients, yet i personally don't believe that such extraordinary conditions could occur naturally
Waves from all wave-centers of the universe combine their intensities forming wave-medium density (space) at each point of space. Total amplitude inward spherical waves colliding at maximum compression points at wave crest and troughs always seek a minimum, equally balanced by opposite eXpansion at interchanging points the sum of opposite vectors is always zero is reason for symmetry or conservation laws or why, at speed of C, Time and Space are zero due to length contraction and time dilation.
I thought that the sun would fuse heavier elements as well, not just helium(after burning up most of its hydrogen), but also carbon, oxygen etc? not as heavy elements as any metals or any thing close to those for that matter, but I didn't think it would go all white dwarf like after just fusing helium??
Well.. When they say light years they mean time from the star to us. For the time question, yes time moves differently but that is relative to us, not the light. So it is our time.
why are some scientists saying the sun will become a white dwarf star and others a red star? Is it because it will become a white AFTER being a red? I need to read (or view!) more on our sun's life cycle. :) Love Sixty Symbols
Did I hear him say that the star collapses when the nuclear reaction "catastrophically" stops in the core? I think he means that when the fuel producing iron in the core runs out, the compression that results does not start a new nuclear reaction because creating any element above iron would require energy, and so the reaction stops catastrophically. Is that correct? And does this happen very quickly, say within hours? minutes?
+Jason Kurant Yeah, Fusing iron is an endothermic process so the star is doomed once it starts fusing silicon into iron. The core collapses very quickly... milliseconds IIRC. So it's very, very fast. The cycle of each fusion stage is shorter and shorter. The hydrogen fusion stage last much, much longer than all of the other stages combined.
@Jebus495 What impact has electricity on our solar system, the galaxy or the universe? I've always been told that matter is on average neutral. I can see how electromagnetism is important locally, as inside a star, in the atmosphere of planets or in the creation of molecules, but not on the scale of the solar system or the galaxy.
..of the degenerate electrons but without any appreciable fall in temperature. The rate of fusion will be uncontrolled. Thus, the onset of helium burning in the Sun will cause an explosive release of energy in a thermal runaway called the Helium flash" Then it states "Eventually Helium fusion will take place in a controlled way in a less dense core of non-degenerate matter" So, roughly what time scales are we talking for He fusion after the He flash has occured? Thanks again.
@omaralmaini Thanks for clearing that up. I've just finished reading 'The Physics of Stars A.C. Philips (S.E) 1999', I clearly didnt read it closely enough. It does, however, state (P.61) "When helium fusion begins in the Sun, the core will consist of a classical gas of ions and a degenerate gas of electrons, with the electron gas providing the bulk of the pressure. The release of excess fusion energy into this mateial will be accompanied by an expansion and a decrease in the energy (cont)..
So it is. I apologize, it's been a while since I took Chemistry. Something IS always emitted, just in this case it's pretty irrelevant. The relevant answer to his claim is actually that plutonium isn't man-made if it's in decaying uranium ores. (Although Uranium could decay into Plutonium using either my method or my method, beta decay. It depends on the substance in question, and I don't know the sequence for uranium.)
@Semikindless Yes i have seen that theory, and it´s the theory that i like the best. It´s just the start of the cycles, that disturb´ed me. So i made my own theory, to give my braine a rest.
I love these short videos they tell more in 6 minutes than the expensive discovery or natgeo or nova documentaries do in 1hour thank guys you guys should get the budget like discovery channel has.
and more than you ever learn in school. This is sad...
false.
@Medic1911
u dont understand
all stars explode at the end , after the explosion ..what is left is a white dwarf ...lots of new elements are sent away from the star after the explosion ..but the white dwarf is left very compressed ...to the point of collapse
if the white dwarf gets the chance to attract new matter ...it will get more mass until it collapses in on itself ..and becomes a black hole.
What an interesting video! Thank you so much for the really cool explanation of how elements are formed!
"If you travelled at the speed of light, it would take you twelve years to cross it"
*brain melts*
2:55 I think you should've used "disastrous" there, not only to break up the use of "catastrophic", but also to share an inside joke with the people who know the root of the word.
+Richard Gerst lol clever.. the one true example of a true disaster.
I think i've spotted an error. At 2:00 the professor says "in more massive stars Helium is fused", after he's already talked about the Sun becoming a white dwarf. As a white dwarf is a Carbon-Oxygen core Helium has already been fused. You don't need a big star to fuse Helium, only Carbon-Oxygen+
It's interesting that this popped up in my suggested youtube so many years later and if anyone is at the helm, you should update the description with a link to one of the many video that explains killonovas are responsible for the most of the heavy elements, not just supernova which is incapable of producing the ratio of heavy elements alone.
i watched so many videos about why star explode but truly understand today.....i think they over simplified things...thanks bro
One question i have always wondered about...
We have about 90 elements naturally occurring, and through this theory I would say that the fusions would produce elements with doubled atomic numbers or at least even numbers like 1-2-6-12....
I personally don't believe that in order to get a lithium atom, a hydrogen and a helium atoms would fuse, simply because the physical conditions required differ between the 2 types.
Thank you for a wonderful but extremely brief clip!
simply amazing footage... thanks!
Very instructive, and clearly explained. I enjoyed this video immensely. The basic facts of science are mind boggling.
short ,simple , frank , and useful
For that example, that would make sense. I just looked up 118 and took it's half life. Most of the more massive elements are much less stable and wouldn't have that super long half-life.
I think I missed that your comment essentially had two discrete parts and thought you meant the elements beyond 118 might be in our crust. Plutonium and such... yeah, definitely, just not in significant enough amounts to use (I'd assume). Man-made pretty much just means we haven't discovered them naturally.
Glad to hear ir, theres a first time for everything.
Great video, very informative and easy to understand
@kipras121 Well from the information I got; Betelgeuse is about 520 light years away. If that sounds far, our galaxy is about 100,000 across. Betelgeuse is also expected to explode as a type II supernova so I'd like to think that we could see it as a small fixed object in the sky from where we are, although it would probably take a really long time to look like anything that really stands out. Even the lowest powered telescopes will have a great view though
When a star explodes it sends its remnants across the galaxy, as said in the video. That's a lot of remnants. These remnants can be gravitationally pulled in again, and become part of an accretion disk in another star, where things like planets are formed.
This is my best guess, for now.
I love learning about Super Novers!
@sbergman27 I think I can answer this. The collapse of the core causes an implosion, sending a shockwave through the outer layers. Those outer layers are still made off lighter elements and the pressure from that shockwave causes them to fuse at much higher rate than normal (pressure generated by gravity), which in term generates even more pressure; setting off a chain reaction. So the star basically explodes.
I think the answer here likes in a misconception about radioactive decay. Something is ALWAYS emitted, never absorbed, now whether that is a proton or an electron or whatever varies. In this case, an electron is emitted from a neutron, and the lack of the negative charge of that electron turns it into a proton, turning uranium into the higher atomic number plutonium. Radioactive elements follow very specific, predictable pathways down to stable elements using these different types of decay.
They spin before they collapse, and since the diameter decreases dramatically, but the angular momentum is the same; like an ice skater tucking in her arms the rate of rotation increases.
So accepting these explanations, other Suns would have had to blown up before our solar system formed. Also the heavier ones would have to migrate around and for some reason we only got **some** of the nova stuff in one spot. It almost makes more sense for like unstable stars to explode before forming our star all within our solar system, or that our sun somehow expelled the material on start up...
FYI the theory for the formation of elements heavier than iron has now changed somewhat. They now believe that a large amount (it may be the majority but I can’t remember off the top of my head) of elements heavier than iron are formed in neutron star mergers
"These are some of the things that hydrogen atoms do given fifteen billion years of cosmic evolution."
-Carl Sagan
Great video. Nice view of the books you've got there.
In case anyone's interested, an interesting read on this exact subject is Radiogenic Isotope Geology(Cambridge Press), it can be read freely on the internet.
One thing I've always wondered is that along with the gravitational ricochet of the star's collapse, wouldn't the fact that a large percentage of the star's mass is undergoing heavy fusion also contribute a tremendous amount of force to the supernova, if not more force than the gravitational collapse?
This is cool, awesome video.
I heard recently that when a star goes super nova the heavier elements are the ones that go the farthest away from the center. The star basically gets ripped inside out
oh and another question: the photograph from the supernovae is made from a composition of xrays, infrared and can't remember. Does that mean that if we were to witness in space with our eyes a supernovae explosion then we won't see any color will we? Only light from the energy but then no color? I wonder what we would actually see?
Yeah, i've got that feeling with almost all the Sixty Symbols vids...
The're too good for their lenght! ;)
@Neutrinoghost: In stellar core temperatures exceeding a hundred million degrees K or so, multiple helium-4 nuclei can be fused to form carbon, oxygen, and so forth. Wiki "triple-alpha process" for more information regarding the subject.
Stars are furnaces for smelting the elements.
A plain mention to Cecilia Payne (who discovered the actual chemical composition of stars) would have been very adecuated in the introduction of the subject.
I just wanted to add that it's not rubber balls we're playing with here, to say that 2+1=3 and thus, a hydrogen and a helium would produce lithium.
There are parameters and physical properties that are different, the temperature and pressure needed to overcome the strong forces of the nuclei of both types differ, when the helium atoms are ready to fuses, theoretically, all hydrogen atoms should have already fused...
That is simply my point....
Could there be some elements that we don't know of that formed by one of these supernovas?
CJCWIS Certainly, because in the universe are bilions of stars..
The periodic table lists 118 elements as of Feb, 2017. I think what you are asking is if there is an undiscovered element or elements with 119 or more protons. I think the answers is "unlikely". Anything with 119 or more protons probably has to be synthesized by man.
Actually, anything beyond Plutonium is man-made
is it possible that there are more elements that we have not yet discovered out there in the universe?
Random question... Are light years measured from our view point, or if we were travelling at the speed of light? Because time passes differently at that speed
Well, the bigger it is, the less stable it is and the faster it decays. Most of the elements that are at the end of the periodic table have incredible short half-lives, for example ununoctium (what 118 is called right now) has a half life of less than a millisecond. So the small amounts of more massive elements quickly decay and don't get a chance to do anything, but theoretically you're probably right, except (probably) for the in the crust thing.
So... How did the Earth get all these heavy elements like Gold, etc. via Meteor/Comet/Asteroid?
I mean, I live on the earth, and we have most of the possible elements (some don't naturally occur, I hear), but the Earth wasn't once upon a time a supernova, was it? Where did Gold come from as far as the earth is concerned?
Refined:
Pauli explusion principle tells us that stars of 1.4 solar masses or higher gives us a neutron star (Chandrasehkar limit), which might be pulsars. It's estimated that stars of ~3 solar masses will turn into a stellar black hole. Not to be confused with primordial and supermassive black holes, th latter of which have been observed to ahve 18billion stellar masses.
Planets are formed from Nebula. The nebula that existed before the formation of the earth may have been a remnant of a supernova explosion or could have contained remnants of a supernova explosion.
Dear Supernova...
Thank you for fixing a problem the universe nearly cursed us with.
For we wouldn't exist if you didn't convert hydrogen and helium into other elements.
@Aviatorsmith no it is hypothesised that matter existed in a different state before the big bang and expanded at the time of the universes birth. Also pretty sure there are 11 dimensions currently believed to exist. It is impossible to measure anything from before the big bang and that is why time is considered to have started then
I thought Hubble's part was in yellow not green! :P haha Awesome Stuff! That's why I love astronomy
2:40 - That is pretty catastrophic.
Why so short ? I would really love longer videos... :)
Good Video
Thnx guys!
"Matter is just another part of the spectrum at various wavelengths wound-up into antimatter over matter within the active cores of galaxies! The Inward spherical waves multiplying time dilation at right-angle's relative to the surrounding masses are compressing the wave-amplitude and cannot escape the singularity we call the atoms wound-up into antimatter over matter in violent motion simulating rest and balance now through violent motion by the inward absorption and outward emission of EMR."
So where do all the neutrons in the "metal" elements (Li - Fe and up) come from? Isn't the proportion of deuterium or tritium pretty low? Are neutrons formed in the cores of stars by some sort of electron/proton fusion process?
I hope we see another supernova like the one in 1054 during my lifetime. It appeared at least three times brighter than what Venus ever gets.
Very informative, thank you!
It makes sense, the key word is "about". Obviously if it was exactly 75% and 1/4 it would equal 100%. But he meant that about 75% is Hydrogen, about 25% is Helium, and then everything else is about 2%. So it could be 73% Hydrogen, 25% Helium, 2% everything else, or 74% Hydrogen, 24% Helium, 2% everything else, or something like that.
Neutrons were effectively cooked up in the big bang, and since they are unstable, had to bond with a proton to keep from undergoing beta decay.
I would imagine that your electron/proton fusion process hypothesis would be correct, since all you need to make a neutron is to fuse it with an electron.
So. Given enough neutrons, anything is possible. Imagine if you will, a rapidly spinning neutron star - where the centrifugal force and neutron degeneracy pressure hold it above the Swarzchild radius. It is spinning and losing energy. Until KER-POP - it drops below the Swarzchild radius and becomes a black hole. It could produce a significant gamma ray burst...
I'd be really interested in knowing where they (and to whom "they" refers)...
i dont question your abilities, but the "bullet speed test" was the pure action in comparison to this. interesting would be the device that makes the alpha particles "visible" by condensation or ionisation.
I read somewhere that from the moment a star starts to produce Fe it is around 250msec before it will explode as a supernova ...
@kipras121 We detect supernova almost on a daily basis so those odds of having one close enough to get a great look at sound pretty good to me, but the chance of it happening in the next 50 years is the same for that of 100, or 200 years, there's just no way of telling when. There are a couple stars out there now that we're monitoring daily for activity. Namely, the star Betelgeuse in the constellation Orion which is over 1000 solar masses
Yes, because as said in this video, continuous nuclear fusion with iron as fuel is unattainable. Any star that is bigger than about 8 solar masses when the hydrogen in its core runs out, will develop an iron core and go supernova.
It's videos like these that make me slightly regretful that I became an engineer :-( Great video!
onion-like layers... stars are ogres
Lewis Witton somebody once told me the world is gonna roll me. I ain't the sharpest tool in the shed.
Shreak is Love shreak is life
@godofwar123786 The "terrestrial planets" are the solid planets, nearest to the Sun - i.e. Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars.
So do stars go from normal to neutron star to black hole? Or do different things happen, depending on the circumstances
What about Lithium and Beryllium? He said in this video Carbon up to Iron are made in the core of the star, but he doesn't say how Lithium and Beryllium are made
Wait so the nuetrons collect in the middle in a dense volume and all the other stuff in all the atoms explodes out?
@sidewaysfcs0718 if i stand correct, it is the bigger starts that collapse into black holes, correct? Why is it that they don't explode? I understand the force of gravity is higher due to the higher mass, but from the video I got the thought of Newtons law in my head. So why is it that the bigger stars dont have an opposite but equal force exerted thus a bigger explosion?
but if there was lot's of matter around, the heavier matter would be pulled to the center more, right? Which means it would go to where the sun would be in a future solar system, which means we on earth should have a much smaller portion of the heavy elements than the sun. Right?
Sorry, misread Neutrinoghost's statement. I thought he was claiming that fusion of the heavier elements could occur regardless of core temperature and mass. Disregard my post. ^^
3:08
Closed Captions
I do belive that just about every element heavier than iron came from supernovae. The rest was produced in nuclear fusion in the cores of stars.
I really want that first color image of a supernova (at 3:40) as my wallpaper
One thing that I think about from time to time is if solar systems for out of a disc of gas and debris, wouldn't the lighter elements float to the outer edge of the disc? How does all the hydrogen and helium get to the middle?
Nabre Labre Well, hydrogen and helium are by far the most common elements in the solar system. They alone make more than 99.9% of the total mass of the solar system, and the rest of matter is just chunks of rocks that float around. What should have happened is that some disturbance to the cloud would make the gas to accumulate in some place, and as it accumulated, its gravitational effect made even more gas to accumulate there, so what's outside of the sun is just the matter that had the right speed to start orbiting it instead of falling inside.
How much of the original star remains in terms of percent mass? And would a supernova explain a gamma ray burst?
AWesome vid :) thanks dudes
well, i believe they may exist in real massive stars, with extraordinary internal pressure than could induce the fusion of much heavier elements to produce the synthetic heavy elements, this is not observed through the wavelength-sensitive telescopes that gives a brief on a star ingredients, yet i personally don't believe that such extraordinary conditions could occur naturally
Waves from all wave-centers of the universe combine their intensities forming wave-medium density (space) at each point of space.
Total amplitude inward spherical waves colliding at maximum compression points at wave crest and troughs always seek a minimum, equally balanced by opposite eXpansion at interchanging points the sum of opposite vectors is always zero is reason for symmetry or conservation laws or why, at speed of C, Time and Space are zero due to length contraction and time dilation.
Can you mine it? If you did, what would you find? mountain sized chunks of pure gold?
well, it's not big (probably better "massive") enough for the other stuff. he said something about that at around 2:00
He jumped straight from Helium to Carbon, how were Lithium and Beryllium formed?
I thought that the sun would fuse heavier elements as well, not just helium(after burning up most of its hydrogen), but also carbon, oxygen etc? not as heavy elements as any metals or any thing close to those for that matter, but I didn't think it would go all white dwarf like after just fusing helium??
Why do Neutron stars always have such high spin rate rotations? What causes the spin? Can one exist with no or low rotation?
Well.. When they say light years they mean time from the star to us. For the time question, yes time moves differently but that is relative to us, not the light. So it is our time.
why are some scientists saying the sun will become a white dwarf star and others a red star? Is it because it will become a white AFTER being a red? I need to read (or view!) more on our sun's life cycle. :) Love Sixty Symbols
Did I hear him say that the star collapses when the nuclear reaction "catastrophically" stops in the core? I think he means that when the fuel producing iron in the core runs out, the compression that results does not start a new nuclear reaction because creating any element above iron would require energy, and so the reaction stops catastrophically. Is that correct? And does this happen very quickly, say within hours? minutes?
+Jason Kurant Yeah, Fusing iron is an endothermic process so the star is doomed once it starts fusing silicon into iron. The core collapses very quickly... milliseconds IIRC. So it's very, very fast. The cycle of each fusion stage is shorter and shorter. The hydrogen fusion stage last much, much longer than all of the other stages combined.
@Jebus495 What impact has electricity on our solar system, the galaxy or the universe? I've always been told that matter is on average neutral. I can see how electromagnetism is important locally, as inside a star, in the atmosphere of planets or in the creation of molecules, but not on the scale of the solar system or the galaxy.
@sidewaysfcs0718 after a supernova, nothing is left. white dwarf is formed when stars are compressed, but not by a supernova
Can someone give me a link to the Super Nova images he had on his computer?
The older you get you realize how little time you have to figure anything out...
..of the degenerate electrons but without any appreciable fall in temperature. The rate of fusion will be uncontrolled. Thus, the onset of helium burning in the Sun will cause an explosive release of energy in a thermal runaway called the Helium flash" Then it states "Eventually Helium fusion will take place in a controlled way in a less dense core of non-degenerate matter"
So, roughly what time scales are we talking for He fusion after the He flash has occured? Thanks again.
and you're not apologizing for for making my brain explode? thanks.
@MrLeonardFalkland Thank you for your clarification. I didn't quite hit the mark :)
whats the difference between a super nova and a black hole
thanks!
@omaralmaini Thanks for clearing that up. I've just finished reading 'The Physics of Stars A.C. Philips (S.E) 1999', I clearly didnt read it closely enough.
It does, however, state (P.61) "When helium fusion begins in the Sun, the core will consist of a classical gas of ions and a degenerate gas of electrons, with the electron gas providing the bulk of the pressure. The release of excess fusion energy into this mateial will be accompanied by an expansion and a decrease in the energy (cont)..
So it is. I apologize, it's been a while since I took Chemistry. Something IS always emitted, just in this case it's pretty irrelevant. The relevant answer to his claim is actually that plutonium isn't man-made if it's in decaying uranium ores. (Although Uranium could decay into Plutonium using either my method or my method, beta decay. It depends on the substance in question, and I don't know the sequence for uranium.)
God made the elements!
Has there been enough time for all these supernovae followed by dispersion and coalescence to have occurred? I guess so.
I wish more stars would explode.
Very interesting, but is this a hypothesis or a theory? Wasn't really clear on that one.
I wonder if you could make a video about it, please. There is little knowledge about it even among many of your subscribers.
@Semikindless Yes i have seen that theory, and it´s the theory that i like the best.
It´s just the start of the cycles, that disturb´ed me. So i made my own theory, to give my braine a rest.