http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-supernova-birth-camera-20180221-story.html

 

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-supernova-birth-camera-20180221-story.html

Such lazy misuse of language.

Saying a "supernova is born" is like saying a corpse is born when its living heart stops.

A supernova is the catastrophic result of the iron death of a star.

 

Such lazy misuse of language.

Saying a "supernova is born" is like saying a corpse is born when its living heart stops.

A supernova is the catastrophic result of the iron death of a star.

The supernova part of the energy equation is a transformation not a death. What's left behind is the womb of the event after a long gestation.

 

The supernova part of the energy equation is a transformation not a death. What's left behind is the womb of the event after a long gestation.

Actually, what's left behind is a womb in which a whole new generation of stars and planets will gestate.

 

Actually, what's left behind is a womb in which a whole new generation of stars and planets will gestate.

Actually what's left behind is a neutron star or a black hole that doesn't contribute much to the universe except electromagnetic waves..

However, the outer layers that were blown off in the supernova blast will be dispersed to form new planets and possibly stars.

 

...to form new planets and possibly stars.

You mean new stars and possibly planets, no?

 

As I understand it elements such as gold are synthesized in a supernova.

 

As I understand it elements such as gold are synthesized in a supernova.

Unlikely.
https://www.livescience.com/60701-ligo-neutron-stars-heavy-metals-gold.html

 

Unlikely.

Be a bit more precise, please.

According to the article, heavy elements -- including gold -- are produced by supernova explosions, just not in quantities large enough to account for the amount of material that actually exists. Neutron star collisions account for most of the material.

 

RE:""elements such as gold are synthesized in a supernova""
Oh those supernovas. Even the life seems was being created in near of supernovas as God left us to see it nowadays. There about 40-60% of interstellar gases (still even at 1E-10 Torr vacuum are some ca 1E+16 molecules per cm3 so we cannot discuss about Cosmic emptyness) in form of i-isopropylcianates and propylene-oxide, both chiral, both capable to polymerizate with themselves in negative ion form under hard ionizating radiation impact, thus making a structures bit similar to amino-acids, as shows a dozen of publications of last few years.
Later those molecules was seeded my meteorites, Cosmic dust etc so the Earth was like to be seeded by life, created at supernovae nearest surroundings. Portugal Alien life Exploration Lab having the tightest collaboration with NASA has measured thousands and thousands of different NASA species found inside and outside our Planet, and most of Space born shown a heavy pollution with aminoacids of Earth types and even non-Earth type of. So... "aliens" already are between us! Where the Scally and Mulder waits so lazy?

 

I have a special camera. It's called a past time camera. A regular camera takes a real time picture. For instance.....12 cows in a pasture.

But when I use my special camera....it takes a picture of all the cows that were ever in the pasture. The picture is plumb full of cows. Thousands of cows.

This is what we see when we look at a star field.......only we do not need a special camera........BECAUSE we have a special pasture....or field.

We have photographed billions of stars........at billions of different times.

We have seen stars explode........But in all those catalogs....we have never seen a star collision. And as far as stars exploding......do we see enough to account for the amounts of heavy atoms we have thru out the universe?

Who are the idiots that give these ideas credence? Why do they insist on what can't be found? We have measured spectral lines of much heavier elements than iron in our sun.


abundance.gif

Think for a second about what gravity really does. You have been taught that it brings matter together.....and we get stars. The stars give off light. Energy.

But stars also emit and accelerate huge quantities of isolated charge. Think about all that emitted charge thru time. Where is it? This particle flux is very high energy......when ever it reacts......there should be emission or an acceleration change. We should see some kind of effect from all this charge flying around. And that charge has real mass. Depending on how you reference energy.........there is a possibly it that it could be a lot more energy in that charge flux.......than in the light emission energy.

Does this flux protect our system in some way?

Is there a low velocity...where charge can not interact?

Could a structural density prevent interaction. Such as where the repulsive and attractive are equal in all directions, relative to a common direction?

They have trouble explaining fundamental observations.........but they got them there black holes down tight. Even tho we have never seen one.

That Hawking and that Einstein are great thinkers...no? They even have a structure for a black hole now........what's the structure of an electron? What is the structure of a nucleus? It's a dense region. That's it.

The catalogs tell us that nova and supernova are rare...which is good for us....and they are pretty. But the effect is nothing in the whole. It's not a driving force. To me they prove the non-existence of black holes. Gravity has a limit.

 

We have measured spectral lines of much heavier elements than iron in our sun.

Duh.

Our earth is accreted from the same material that makes up our sun (less the H2 and He that escaped during the accretion process). Of course one would expect heavy elements in the sun. That doesn't mean they were formed there -- just as they weren't formed on earth.

 

Duh.

Our earth is accreted from the same material that makes up our sun (less the H2 and He that escaped during the accretion process). Of course one would expect heavy elements in the sun. That doesn't mean they were formed there -- just as they weren't formed on earth.

Some light reading...

 

But we measure heavy isotopes......whose parental half-life is fleeting. They can't be leftovers.

I understand it has been a matter of contention not publicized. An scientific anomaly.

 

Be a bit more precise, please.

According to the article, heavy elements -- including gold -- are produced by supernova explosions, just not in quantities large enough to account for the amount of material that actually exists. Neutron star collisions account for most of the material.

The current thinking after analyzing the most recent data is that the vast majority (heavy metal r-process) is from Neutron stars not directly from the Supernova event r-process process.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/did-...-forge-the-universes-supply-of-gold-20170323/

The answer, many astronomers believe, will end up being some kind of compromise. That shift may already be happening. “R process is really not r process anymore now,” Frebel said. Maybe it can be broken in half, with the “weak” r-process elements lighter than barium coming from supernovas, and the heavier ones like gold coming from neutron star collisions.

https://www.ligo.org/science/Publication-GW170817Kilonova/index.php

The r-process
The rapid neutron capture process, or r-process, is one channel through which elements heavier than Iron can be created, and it has been suggested that previous NS mergers could have been the source of the r-process elements we see in the galaxy today, including all the ones we have here on Earth. Supernovae are also expected to contribute to these abundances, though it is unknown if supernovae or NS mergers are the dominant r-process site. If NS mergers are to account for all the r-process elements observed, they must eject substantial r-process matter and have a relatively high rate of occurrence in the Universe. From our GW data on GW170817, we get constraints on both the ejecta mass and the NS merger rate, which can then be used to estimate the NS merger contribution to r-process abundances. Assuming that all NS mergers have properties like those inferred from GW170817, we find that if >~10% of the dynamically ejected mass is converted to r-process elements, NS mergers could account for all the observed r-process abundances. Future observations of GWs from NS mergers will help solve the longstanding mystery of where the majority of r-process elements are created.