PDA

View Full Version : Star go boom



Space Monkey
2005-Feb-23, 03:00 PM
Star go boom,
leaves behind a huge cloud of "star stuff"
And they call is a "Star Nursery"

Wouldn't the laws of diminishing returns dictate that you'd have less stuff to make new stars?

One star becomes several?

Unless were talking about one big a$$ star.

crosscountry
2005-Feb-23, 03:26 PM
Star go boom,

Unless were talking about one big a$$ star.

exactly. the first generation stars were hundreds of times larger than our own. when they exploded (after very short lifespans) they put out enough mass to make many other stars. thus the term Stelar Nursery.

2nd generation stars were made up of that material. because they were composed more of helium and were smaller than the 1st gens (it was created in the 1st gen) they lasted longer. That causes them to make bigger elements; nitrogen, oxygen, and others.

Disinfo Agent
2005-Feb-23, 03:45 PM
That causes them to make bigger elements; nitrogen, oxygen, and others.
Hevier elements? :wink:

ngc3314
2005-Feb-23, 04:07 PM
Wouldn't the laws of diminishing returns dictate that you'd have less stuff to make new stars?



Eventually. Supernova outbursts are not the major source of interstellar gas (although they are the major source of most of the heavier elements). Much of the interstellar gas today has never (best we can tell) yet been part of a star. We can take the rate at which galaxies are forming stars now and compare to their total reservoirs of gas, and ask how long they can keep this up. Elliptical galaxies pretty much used up their gas long ago (except those that engineered hostile takeovers of resource-rich neighbors); spirals can keep significant star formation going for timespans several times the current age of the Universe; and some irregular galaxies could keep going for a hundred billions years without slacking off much. And that newly reported dark H I galaxy could use a technicality to maintain its present rate indefinitely, not that it's much help.

To reduce confusion - the nebulae resulting from supernova explosions are not the same kind of nebulae referred to as stellar nurseries, except in the sense that similar radiation processes produce the optical radiation from both.

crosscountry
2005-Feb-23, 04:46 PM
That causes them to make bigger elements; nitrogen, oxygen, and others.
Hevier elements? :wink:

:lol: from the Disinfo Agent. :lol:

I meant heavier elements.

Disinfo Agent
2005-Feb-23, 04:53 PM
The disinformation was in the typo. Must distract GLPers. :wink:

Space Monkey
2005-Feb-23, 05:08 PM
LOL, I love how katty ppl get around here!

CORRECTION: ISN'T IS ACTUALLY CATTY?

CORRECTED CORRECTION: ISN'T IS FELINISH?

CORRECTION OF THE CORRECTED CORRECTION: ISN'T IT ACTUALLY BETTER TO SAY THAT THE BEHAVIOR IS OF A FELINE NATURE?

CORRECTION OF THE CORRECTION OR THE CORRECTED CORRECTION:
ISN'T THE TERM KATTY REFERING TO THE STEREOTYPICAL INFIGHTING THAT TAKES PLACE IN THE SOCIAL DYNAMICS BETWEEN WOMEN?

Kristophe
2005-Feb-23, 05:37 PM
LOL, I love how katty ppl get around here!

CORRECTION: ISN'T IS ACTUALLY CATTY?

CORRECTED CORRECTION: ISN'T IS FELINISH?

CORRECTION OF THE CORRECTED CORRECTION: ISN'T IT ACTUALLY BETTER TO SAY THAT THE BEHAVIOR IS OF A FELINE NATURE?

CORRECTION OF THE CORRECTION OR THE CORRECTED CORRECTION:
ISN'T THE TERM KATTY REFERING TO THE STEREOTYPICAL INFIGHTING THAT TAKES PLACE IN THE SOCIAL DYNAMICS BETWEEN WOMEN?

Oooowwwww. Must you really scream like that?

Disinfo Agent
2005-Feb-23, 05:51 PM
LOL, I love how katty ppl get around here!

CORRECTION: ISN'T IS ACTUALLY CATTY?

CORRECTED CORRECTION: ISN'T IS FELINISH?

CORRECTION OF THE CORRECTED CORRECTION: ISN'T IT ACTUALLY BETTER TO SAY THAT THE BEHAVIOR IS OF A FELINE NATURE?

CORRECTION OF THE CORRECTION OR THE CORRECTED CORRECTION:
ISN'T THE TERM KATTY REFERING TO THE STEREOTYPICAL INFIGHTING THAT TAKES PLACE IN THE SOCIAL DYNAMICS BETWEEN WOMEN?
Anything to make you happy. :)

Space Monkey
2005-Feb-23, 07:07 PM
it's just a commentary on how ofter intelligent dialect is hijacked by overly intelligent english majors.

oh and the caps were for emphasis not yelling.

We need to quit before dad comes.

Disinfo Agent
2005-Feb-23, 07:20 PM
it's just a commentary on how ofter intelligent dialect is hijacked by overly intelligent english majors.
What English majors?

Normandy6644
2005-Feb-23, 07:29 PM
it's just a commentary on how ofter intelligent dialect is hijacked by overly intelligent english majors.
What English majors?

I'm sure we have a few somewhere, even if they're only lurking. :D

Disinfo Agent
2005-Feb-23, 07:44 PM
But they can hardly hijack a thread if they're only lurking. :D

Space Monkey
2005-Feb-24, 05:11 AM
My N is missing pixels.

W.F. Tomba
2005-Feb-24, 06:27 AM
I'm an English major, but I don't usually bother to correct other people's spelling mistakes, because my study of English has led me to realize that what we call "standard" orthography is just layer upon layer of old mistakes accumulated over the centuries (mostly pronunciation mistakes, since widespread literacy is so recent, but some prominent old spelling errors as well).

So I used to be a real pedant, but now I don't give a rat's hindquarters. I use impeccable spelling myself just to show off.

Disinfo Agent
2005-Feb-24, 09:49 AM
Is it pedantic to correct oneself? :)

Kizarvexis
2005-Feb-24, 12:05 PM
On the topic of bigger elements vs heavier elements, wouldn't helium be both bigger and heavier than hydrogen by virtue of having twice as many protons and electrons as well as two neutrons? Also, wouldn't that hold generally true for other elements as you move up the element list?

Kizarvexis

Edited: added what helium is bigger than before someone asks :)

Disinfo Agent
2005-Feb-24, 12:49 PM
You're identifying "size" with "number of electrons". But don't the electrons in H and He orbit the nucleous at basically the same distance?

crosscountry
2005-Feb-24, 01:27 PM
You're identifying "size" with "number of electrons". But don't the electrons in H and He orbit the nucleous at basically the same distance?

"basically" yes,

but the last of Lithium orbits further out than either H or He. And of course Pb has many more orbitals. [-(

Disinfo Agent
2005-Feb-24, 01:38 PM
"basically" yes,
I know, I know, but this is tricky enough as it is. :wink:

Jpax2003
2005-Feb-24, 06:03 PM
Why not just say that element is massier than another element, but only when it's true (isotopes and such).

Can't say bigger because people think they don't know if you mean electron orbitals or nuclear particles. Can't say heavier because that assumes a gravity field effect. For example, hydrogen-protium can be heavier than helium-4 (quantium?) if the H1 is sitting in a gravity well while He4 is flying about in freefall orbits or faster.

Maddad
2005-Feb-25, 08:24 AM
Supernova outbursts are not the major source of interstellar gas (although they are the major source of most of the heavier elements).Let me be really nit-picky here. If you said they are the source of all the elements heavier than iron, I'd accept that. However, the population of stars that are too lightweight to go supernova so greatly outnumbers those that can that these should contribute more to the general mix of elements heavier than Helium. Low mass stars blow off up to 50% of their mass during their planetary nebula stage. These would include elements like carbon, oxygen, and silicone. My guess is that they wouldn't blow off iron vapor, but I could be wrong. Certainly though they have no process capable of making anything heavier, other than neutronium which stays put in the core.

I understand the objection to using the word heavy in referring to a nucleus, but I'm going to use it anyway because it's a label and it's too difficule to give an explanation every time you need a single word that people understand anyway.

Jpax2003
2005-Feb-25, 05:53 PM
I understand the objection to using the word heavy in referring to a nucleus, but I'm going to use it anyway because it's a label and it's too difficule to give an explanation every time you need a single word that people understand anyway.Besides, if you start saying something is massier or masses more than something else the layperson will think massive means huge and get confused. We should have a special place for all those people that say massive for something that is simply big in a volumetric or numeric sense. Oddly enough, those people also don't understand the the term "dense." :D

Maddad
2005-Feb-27, 12:43 AM
Oddly enough, those people also don't understand the the term "dense." :DThat's because they have so much mass for their volume.

ngc3314
2005-Feb-27, 02:50 AM
I understand the objection to using the word heavy in referring to a nucleus, but I'm going to use it anyway because it's a label and it's too difficule to give an explanation every time you need a single word that people understand anyway.Besides, if you start saying something is massier or masses more than something else the layperson will think massive means huge and get confused. We should have a special place for all those people that say massive for something that is simply big in a volumetric or numeric sense. Oddly enough, those people also don't understand the the term "dense." :D

Oh, that's just great. You've saturated my irony meter, and I have to go recalibrate the thing from scratch.

Jpax2003
2005-Feb-27, 07:03 AM
I understand the objection to using the word heavy in referring to a nucleus, but I'm going to use it anyway because it's a label and it's too difficule to give an explanation every time you need a single word that people understand anyway.Besides, if you start saying something is massier or masses more than something else the layperson will think massive means huge and get confused. We should have a special place for all those people that say massive for something that is simply big in a volumetric or numeric sense. Oddly enough, those people also don't understand the the term "dense." :D

Oh, that's just great. You've saturated my irony meter, and I have to go recalibrate the thing from scratch.If I had a nickel for every irony meted out...

Maddad
2005-Feb-28, 06:05 AM
Sigh. This is the third time now I've done gone and looked up ngc3314 to see what the heck it is. You'd think I'd remember by now.