Why is there so much iron? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowOrigin of elements heavier than Iron...
What does "Its cash flow is deeply negative" mean?
Poetry, calligrams and TikZ/PStricks challenge
INSERT to a table from a database to other (same SQL Server) using Dynamic SQL
How to get from Geneva Airport to Metabief, Doubs, France by public transport?
How to edit “Name” property in GCI output?
How to avoid supervisors with prejudiced views?
Reference request: Grassmannian and Plucker coordinates in type B, C, D
Does soap repel water?
Is the D&D universe the same as the Forgotten Realms universe?
Running a General Election and the European Elections together
A Man With a Stainless Steel Endoskeleton (like The Terminator) Fighting Cloaked Aliens Only He Can See
WOW air has ceased operation, can I get my tickets refunded?
I want to delete every two lines after 3rd lines in file contain very large number of lines :
How to count occurrences of text in a file?
Is wanting to ask what to write an indication that you need to change your story?
Proper way to express "He disappeared them"
Method for adding error messages to a dictionary given a key
Calculator final project in Python
When you upcast Blindness/Deafness, do all targets suffer the same effect?
How to check if all elements of 1 list are in the *same quantity* and in any order, in the list2?
How to invert MapIndexed on a ragged structure? How to construct a tree from rules?
Easy to read palindrome checker
What happened in Rome, when the western empire "fell"?
How did people program for Consoles with multiple CPUs?
Why is there so much iron?
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowOrigin of elements heavier than Iron (Fe)What happens to the neighboring star of a type Ia supernova?New Type of Type Ia supernova. Implications to Dark Energy measurement?What prevents a star from collapsing after stellar death?A Theory of Almost Everything?Type II supernovae explosionsHow do scientists know Iron-60 is created during supernovae?Can nuclear fusion alone account for the energy output from type 1a supernova?Why do neutron stars fed by another star not produce a second supernova like white dwarf supernovae?Why does a star with its core collapsing and about to undergo a supernova, explode, instead of rapidly collapsing all of its matter into a black hole?
$begingroup$
We all know where iron comes from. However, as I am reading up on supernovas, I started to wonder why there is as much iron as there is in the universe.
Neither brown dwarfs nor white dwarfs deposit iron.
Type I supernovas leave no remnant so I can see where there would be iron released.
Type II supernovas leave either a neutron star or a black hole. As I understand it, the iron ash core collapses and the shock wave blows the rest of the star apart. Therefore no iron is released. (I know some would be made in the explosion along with all of the elements up to uranium. But would that account for all of the iron in the universe?)
Hypernovas will deposit iron, but they seem to be really rare.
Do Type I supernovas happen so frequently that iron is this common? Or am I missing something?
astrophysics astronomy supernova
edited Mar 18 at 11:28
Rodrigo de Azevedo
1617
asked Mar 17 at 1:43
RickRick
642314
$endgroup$
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
We all know where iron comes from. However, as I am reading up on supernovas, I started to wonder why there is as much iron as there is in the universe.
Neither brown dwarfs nor white dwarfs deposit iron.
Type I supernovas leave no remnant so I can see where there would be iron released.
Type II supernovas leave either a neutron star or a black hole. As I understand it, the iron ash core collapses and the shock wave blows the rest of the star apart. Therefore no iron is released. (I know some would be made in the explosion along with all of the elements up to uranium. But would that account for all of the iron in the universe?)
Hypernovas will deposit iron, but they seem to be really rare.
Do Type I supernovas happen so frequently that iron is this common? Or am I missing something?
astrophysics astronomy supernova
edited Mar 18 at 11:28
Rodrigo de Azevedo
1617
asked Mar 17 at 1:43
RickRick
642314
$endgroup$
11
$begingroup$
Therefore no iron is released. are you sure?
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 1:47
3
$begingroup$
This table in Wikipedia's "Nucleosynthesis" article might help, detailed here.
$endgroup$
– Nat
Mar 17 at 2:15
2
$begingroup$
I would disagree with you... There is a LOT of iron, almost as much as Oxygen and Carbon (as well as silicon)...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis#/media/…
$endgroup$
– Rick
Mar 17 at 22:47
1
$begingroup$
@Jepsilon Specifically, Ni-62 is the peak. However, iron is easier to produce, so while Ni-62 is (very very slightly) more stable, there's more iron. Binding energy isn't everything - after all, most of the visible matter in the universe is still hydrogen, which is a stable element with (one of?) the highest energy per nucleon.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:56
1
$begingroup$
Also, type Ia supernovae leave no remnant. Most type Ib and Ic supernovae do leave a remnant, just like most type II supernovae do. (Exceptions are the rare Ib/Ic/II supernovae resulting from pair-production-triggered instability, which leave no remnants.)
$endgroup$
– Sean
Mar 19 at 2:57
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
We all know where iron comes from. However, as I am reading up on supernovas, I started to wonder why there is as much iron as there is in the universe.
Neither brown dwarfs nor white dwarfs deposit iron.
Type I supernovas leave no remnant so I can see where there would be iron released.
Type II supernovas leave either a neutron star or a black hole. As I understand it, the iron ash core collapses and the shock wave blows the rest of the star apart. Therefore no iron is released. (I know some would be made in the explosion along with all of the elements up to uranium. But would that account for all of the iron in the universe?)
Hypernovas will deposit iron, but they seem to be really rare.
Do Type I supernovas happen so frequently that iron is this common? Or am I missing something?
astrophysics astronomy supernova
edited Mar 18 at 11:28
Rodrigo de Azevedo
1617
asked Mar 17 at 1:43
RickRick
642314
$endgroup$
We all know where iron comes from. However, as I am reading up on supernovas, I started to wonder why there is as much iron as there is in the universe.
Neither brown dwarfs nor white dwarfs deposit iron.
Type I supernovas leave no remnant so I can see where there would be iron released.
Type II supernovas leave either a neutron star or a black hole. As I understand it, the iron ash core collapses and the shock wave blows the rest of the star apart. Therefore no iron is released. (I know some would be made in the explosion along with all of the elements up to uranium. But would that account for all of the iron in the universe?)
Hypernovas will deposit iron, but they seem to be really rare.
Do Type I supernovas happen so frequently that iron is this common? Or am I missing something?
astrophysics astronomy supernova
astrophysics astronomy supernova
edited Mar 18 at 11:28
Rodrigo de Azevedo
1617
asked Mar 17 at 1:43
RickRick
642314
edited Mar 18 at 11:28
Rodrigo de Azevedo
1617
asked Mar 17 at 1:43
RickRick
642314
edited Mar 18 at 11:28
Rodrigo de Azevedo
1617
edited Mar 18 at 11:28
Rodrigo de Azevedo
1617
edited Mar 18 at 11:28
Rodrigo de Azevedo
1617
1617
asked Mar 17 at 1:43
RickRick
642314
asked Mar 17 at 1:43
RickRick
642314
asked Mar 17 at 1:43
RickRick
642314
642314
11
$begingroup$
Therefore no iron is released. are you sure?
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 1:47
3
$begingroup$
This table in Wikipedia's "Nucleosynthesis" article might help, detailed here.
$endgroup$
– Nat
Mar 17 at 2:15
2
$begingroup$
I would disagree with you... There is a LOT of iron, almost as much as Oxygen and Carbon (as well as silicon)...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis#/media/…
$endgroup$
– Rick
Mar 17 at 22:47
1
$begingroup$
@Jepsilon Specifically, Ni-62 is the peak. However, iron is easier to produce, so while Ni-62 is (very very slightly) more stable, there's more iron. Binding energy isn't everything - after all, most of the visible matter in the universe is still hydrogen, which is a stable element with (one of?) the highest energy per nucleon.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:56
1
$begingroup$
Also, type Ia supernovae leave no remnant. Most type Ib and Ic supernovae do leave a remnant, just like most type II supernovae do. (Exceptions are the rare Ib/Ic/II supernovae resulting from pair-production-triggered instability, which leave no remnants.)
$endgroup$
– Sean
Mar 19 at 2:57
|
show 4 more comments
11
$begingroup$
Therefore no iron is released. are you sure?
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 1:47
3
$begingroup$
This table in Wikipedia's "Nucleosynthesis" article might help, detailed here.
$endgroup$
– Nat
Mar 17 at 2:15
2
$begingroup$
I would disagree with you... There is a LOT of iron, almost as much as Oxygen and Carbon (as well as silicon)...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis#/media/…
$endgroup$
– Rick
Mar 17 at 22:47
1
$begingroup$
@Jepsilon Specifically, Ni-62 is the peak. However, iron is easier to produce, so while Ni-62 is (very very slightly) more stable, there's more iron. Binding energy isn't everything - after all, most of the visible matter in the universe is still hydrogen, which is a stable element with (one of?) the highest energy per nucleon.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:56
1
$begingroup$
Also, type Ia supernovae leave no remnant. Most type Ib and Ic supernovae do leave a remnant, just like most type II supernovae do. (Exceptions are the rare Ib/Ic/II supernovae resulting from pair-production-triggered instability, which leave no remnants.)
$endgroup$
– Sean
Mar 19 at 2:57
11
11
$begingroup$
Therefore no iron is released. are you sure?
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 1:47
$begingroup$
Therefore no iron is released. are you sure?
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 1:47
3
3
$begingroup$
This table in Wikipedia's "Nucleosynthesis" article might help, detailed here.
$endgroup$
– Nat
Mar 17 at 2:15
$begingroup$
This table in Wikipedia's "Nucleosynthesis" article might help, detailed here.
$endgroup$
– Nat
Mar 17 at 2:15
2
2
$begingroup$
I would disagree with you... There is a LOT of iron, almost as much as Oxygen and Carbon (as well as silicon)...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis#/media/…
$endgroup$
– Rick
Mar 17 at 22:47
$begingroup$
I would disagree with you... There is a LOT of iron, almost as much as Oxygen and Carbon (as well as silicon)...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis#/media/…
$endgroup$
– Rick
Mar 17 at 22:47
1
1
$begingroup$
@Jepsilon Specifically, Ni-62 is the peak. However, iron is easier to produce, so while Ni-62 is (very very slightly) more stable, there's more iron. Binding energy isn't everything - after all, most of the visible matter in the universe is still hydrogen, which is a stable element with (one of?) the highest energy per nucleon.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:56
$begingroup$
@Jepsilon Specifically, Ni-62 is the peak. However, iron is easier to produce, so while Ni-62 is (very very slightly) more stable, there's more iron. Binding energy isn't everything - after all, most of the visible matter in the universe is still hydrogen, which is a stable element with (one of?) the highest energy per nucleon.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:56
1
1
$begingroup$
Also, type Ia supernovae leave no remnant. Most type Ib and Ic supernovae do leave a remnant, just like most type II supernovae do. (Exceptions are the rare Ib/Ic/II supernovae resulting from pair-production-triggered instability, which leave no remnants.)
$endgroup$
– Sean
Mar 19 at 2:57
$begingroup$
Also, type Ia supernovae leave no remnant. Most type Ib and Ic supernovae do leave a remnant, just like most type II supernovae do. (Exceptions are the rare Ib/Ic/II supernovae resulting from pair-production-triggered instability, which leave no remnants.)
$endgroup$
– Sean
Mar 19 at 2:57
|
show 4 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The solar abundance of iron is a little bit more than a thousandth by mass. If we assume that all the baryonic mass in the disc of the Galaxy (a few $10^{10}$ solar masses) is polluted in the same way, then more than 10 million solar masses of iron must have been produced and distributed by stars.
A type Ia supernova results in something like 0.5-1 solar masses of iron (via decaying Ni 56), thus requiring about 20-50 million type Ia supernovae to explain all the Galactic Fe.
Given the age of the Galaxy of 10 billion years, this requires a type Ia supernova rate of one every 200-500 years.
The rate of type Ia supernovae in our Galaxy is not observationally measured, though there have likely been several in the last 1000 years. The rate above seems entirely plausible and was probably higher in the past.
answered Mar 17 at 8:32
Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries
70.2k7142243
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
On an important side note: Iron has one of the largest nuclear binding energies (See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…). So eventually, the percentage of iron in the universe will increase with time, as it is a stable end-product of both nuclear fusion and nuclear decay.
$endgroup$
– Robert Tausig
Mar 17 at 15:16
$begingroup$
@RobertTausig doesn't iron have THE largest nuclear binding energy (rather than just "one of the largest")?
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:42
$begingroup$
Rob, I like your answer. Perhaps it could be even better if you include an approximate rate of double neutron star mergers (which of course the rate is very uncertain but we know that such mergers produce lots of heavy elements) ? Such a NS-NS rate is expected to be at least on the same order as that of supernovae.
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:48
11
$begingroup$
@N.Steinle The Q asks whether type Ia supernovae can be responsible for all the iron. Neutron star mergers do not produce iron. Iron does have "one of the largest" binding energies per nucleon. It is not the largest. That would be Ni 62.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 17 at 22:54
$begingroup$
Thank you very much for clarifying!
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 18 at 1:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Iron comes from exploding white dwarfs and exploding massive stars(Wikipedia).
(One of many amazing images by Cmglee )
Periodic table showing the cosmogenic origin of each element. Elements from carbon up to sulfur may be made in small stars by the alpha process. Elements beyond iron are made in large stars with slow neutron capture (s-process), followed by expulsion to space in gas ejections (see planetary nebulae). Elements heavier than iron may be made in neutron star mergers or supernovae after the r-process, involving a dense burst of neutrons and rapid capture by the element.
answered Mar 17 at 15:15
Keith McClaryKeith McClary
1,411411
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
While this may answer the question, it is preferable to have the content of the link copied into the post to avoid issues such s link rot, going off-site, etc.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 21:12
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Iron is at the minimum point for energy release from fusion. For all atomic numbers less than that of iron, there is a net release of energy as additional protons and neutrons are added. Beyond iron, it's the reverse; energy must be input to fuse protons and neutrons into larger nuclei, which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events and larger nuclei release energy on fission. As long as there are conditions to drive these processes, the tendency will be to build smaller nuclei up to iron and split larger nuclei down toward iron.
answered Mar 18 at 0:03
Anthony XAnthony X
2,78611220
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
True, but not what the Rick is asking about. He's not concerned with how iron is produced, but how it's distributed - that is, how it gets into interstellar space and (eventually) other stars and planets.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:51
$begingroup$
"which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events". Not true.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 18 at 13:34
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The nucleosynthesis in the inner of the stars generates energy: The huge amounts of energy form Helium from hydrogen. The star then start generating carbon from helium and so an. This finishes with iron. To generate with larger atomic numbers the star needs more energy. Most of them are generated in supernovae, where there is a lot more energy.
edited Mar 18 at 5:53
Minijack
1032
answered Mar 17 at 5:46
Uwe PilzUwe Pilz
797
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f466889%2fwhy-is-there-so-much-iron%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The solar abundance of iron is a little bit more than a thousandth by mass. If we assume that all the baryonic mass in the disc of the Galaxy (a few $10^{10}$ solar masses) is polluted in the same way, then more than 10 million solar masses of iron must have been produced and distributed by stars.
A type Ia supernova results in something like 0.5-1 solar masses of iron (via decaying Ni 56), thus requiring about 20-50 million type Ia supernovae to explain all the Galactic Fe.
Given the age of the Galaxy of 10 billion years, this requires a type Ia supernova rate of one every 200-500 years.
The rate of type Ia supernovae in our Galaxy is not observationally measured, though there have likely been several in the last 1000 years. The rate above seems entirely plausible and was probably higher in the past.
answered Mar 17 at 8:32
Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries
70.2k7142243
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
On an important side note: Iron has one of the largest nuclear binding energies (See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…). So eventually, the percentage of iron in the universe will increase with time, as it is a stable end-product of both nuclear fusion and nuclear decay.
$endgroup$
– Robert Tausig
Mar 17 at 15:16
$begingroup$
@RobertTausig doesn't iron have THE largest nuclear binding energy (rather than just "one of the largest")?
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:42
$begingroup$
Rob, I like your answer. Perhaps it could be even better if you include an approximate rate of double neutron star mergers (which of course the rate is very uncertain but we know that such mergers produce lots of heavy elements) ? Such a NS-NS rate is expected to be at least on the same order as that of supernovae.
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:48
11
$begingroup$
@N.Steinle The Q asks whether type Ia supernovae can be responsible for all the iron. Neutron star mergers do not produce iron. Iron does have "one of the largest" binding energies per nucleon. It is not the largest. That would be Ni 62.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 17 at 22:54
$begingroup$
Thank you very much for clarifying!
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 18 at 1:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The solar abundance of iron is a little bit more than a thousandth by mass. If we assume that all the baryonic mass in the disc of the Galaxy (a few $10^{10}$ solar masses) is polluted in the same way, then more than 10 million solar masses of iron must have been produced and distributed by stars.
A type Ia supernova results in something like 0.5-1 solar masses of iron (via decaying Ni 56), thus requiring about 20-50 million type Ia supernovae to explain all the Galactic Fe.
Given the age of the Galaxy of 10 billion years, this requires a type Ia supernova rate of one every 200-500 years.
The rate of type Ia supernovae in our Galaxy is not observationally measured, though there have likely been several in the last 1000 years. The rate above seems entirely plausible and was probably higher in the past.
answered Mar 17 at 8:32
Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries
70.2k7142243
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
On an important side note: Iron has one of the largest nuclear binding energies (See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…). So eventually, the percentage of iron in the universe will increase with time, as it is a stable end-product of both nuclear fusion and nuclear decay.
$endgroup$
– Robert Tausig
Mar 17 at 15:16
$begingroup$
@RobertTausig doesn't iron have THE largest nuclear binding energy (rather than just "one of the largest")?
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:42
$begingroup$
Rob, I like your answer. Perhaps it could be even better if you include an approximate rate of double neutron star mergers (which of course the rate is very uncertain but we know that such mergers produce lots of heavy elements) ? Such a NS-NS rate is expected to be at least on the same order as that of supernovae.
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:48
11
$begingroup$
@N.Steinle The Q asks whether type Ia supernovae can be responsible for all the iron. Neutron star mergers do not produce iron. Iron does have "one of the largest" binding energies per nucleon. It is not the largest. That would be Ni 62.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 17 at 22:54
$begingroup$
Thank you very much for clarifying!
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 18 at 1:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The solar abundance of iron is a little bit more than a thousandth by mass. If we assume that all the baryonic mass in the disc of the Galaxy (a few $10^{10}$ solar masses) is polluted in the same way, then more than 10 million solar masses of iron must have been produced and distributed by stars.
A type Ia supernova results in something like 0.5-1 solar masses of iron (via decaying Ni 56), thus requiring about 20-50 million type Ia supernovae to explain all the Galactic Fe.
Given the age of the Galaxy of 10 billion years, this requires a type Ia supernova rate of one every 200-500 years.
The rate of type Ia supernovae in our Galaxy is not observationally measured, though there have likely been several in the last 1000 years. The rate above seems entirely plausible and was probably higher in the past.
answered Mar 17 at 8:32
Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries
70.2k7142243
$endgroup$
The solar abundance of iron is a little bit more than a thousandth by mass. If we assume that all the baryonic mass in the disc of the Galaxy (a few $10^{10}$ solar masses) is polluted in the same way, then more than 10 million solar masses of iron must have been produced and distributed by stars.
A type Ia supernova results in something like 0.5-1 solar masses of iron (via decaying Ni 56), thus requiring about 20-50 million type Ia supernovae to explain all the Galactic Fe.
Given the age of the Galaxy of 10 billion years, this requires a type Ia supernova rate of one every 200-500 years.
The rate of type Ia supernovae in our Galaxy is not observationally measured, though there have likely been several in the last 1000 years. The rate above seems entirely plausible and was probably higher in the past.
answered Mar 17 at 8:32
Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries
70.2k7142243
answered Mar 17 at 8:32
Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries
70.2k7142243
answered Mar 17 at 8:32
Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries
70.2k7142243
answered Mar 17 at 8:32
Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries
70.2k7142243
70.2k7142243
3
$begingroup$
On an important side note: Iron has one of the largest nuclear binding energies (See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…). So eventually, the percentage of iron in the universe will increase with time, as it is a stable end-product of both nuclear fusion and nuclear decay.
$endgroup$
– Robert Tausig
Mar 17 at 15:16
$begingroup$
@RobertTausig doesn't iron have THE largest nuclear binding energy (rather than just "one of the largest")?
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:42
$begingroup$
Rob, I like your answer. Perhaps it could be even better if you include an approximate rate of double neutron star mergers (which of course the rate is very uncertain but we know that such mergers produce lots of heavy elements) ? Such a NS-NS rate is expected to be at least on the same order as that of supernovae.
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:48
11
$begingroup$
@N.Steinle The Q asks whether type Ia supernovae can be responsible for all the iron. Neutron star mergers do not produce iron. Iron does have "one of the largest" binding energies per nucleon. It is not the largest. That would be Ni 62.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 17 at 22:54
$begingroup$
Thank you very much for clarifying!
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 18 at 1:55
add a comment |
3
$begingroup$
On an important side note: Iron has one of the largest nuclear binding energies (See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…). So eventually, the percentage of iron in the universe will increase with time, as it is a stable end-product of both nuclear fusion and nuclear decay.
$endgroup$
– Robert Tausig
Mar 17 at 15:16
$begingroup$
@RobertTausig doesn't iron have THE largest nuclear binding energy (rather than just "one of the largest")?
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:42
$begingroup$
Rob, I like your answer. Perhaps it could be even better if you include an approximate rate of double neutron star mergers (which of course the rate is very uncertain but we know that such mergers produce lots of heavy elements) ? Such a NS-NS rate is expected to be at least on the same order as that of supernovae.
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:48
11
$begingroup$
@N.Steinle The Q asks whether type Ia supernovae can be responsible for all the iron. Neutron star mergers do not produce iron. Iron does have "one of the largest" binding energies per nucleon. It is not the largest. That would be Ni 62.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 17 at 22:54
$begingroup$
Thank you very much for clarifying!
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 18 at 1:55
3
3
$begingroup$
On an important side note: Iron has one of the largest nuclear binding energies (See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…). So eventually, the percentage of iron in the universe will increase with time, as it is a stable end-product of both nuclear fusion and nuclear decay.
$endgroup$
– Robert Tausig
Mar 17 at 15:16
$begingroup$
On an important side note: Iron has one of the largest nuclear binding energies (See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…). So eventually, the percentage of iron in the universe will increase with time, as it is a stable end-product of both nuclear fusion and nuclear decay.
$endgroup$
– Robert Tausig
Mar 17 at 15:16
$begingroup$
@RobertTausig doesn't iron have THE largest nuclear binding energy (rather than just "one of the largest")?
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:42
$begingroup$
@RobertTausig doesn't iron have THE largest nuclear binding energy (rather than just "one of the largest")?
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:42
$begingroup$
Rob, I like your answer. Perhaps it could be even better if you include an approximate rate of double neutron star mergers (which of course the rate is very uncertain but we know that such mergers produce lots of heavy elements) ? Such a NS-NS rate is expected to be at least on the same order as that of supernovae.
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:48
$begingroup$
Rob, I like your answer. Perhaps it could be even better if you include an approximate rate of double neutron star mergers (which of course the rate is very uncertain but we know that such mergers produce lots of heavy elements) ? Such a NS-NS rate is expected to be at least on the same order as that of supernovae.
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 17 at 21:48
11
11
$begingroup$
@N.Steinle The Q asks whether type Ia supernovae can be responsible for all the iron. Neutron star mergers do not produce iron. Iron does have "one of the largest" binding energies per nucleon. It is not the largest. That would be Ni 62.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 17 at 22:54
$begingroup$
@N.Steinle The Q asks whether type Ia supernovae can be responsible for all the iron. Neutron star mergers do not produce iron. Iron does have "one of the largest" binding energies per nucleon. It is not the largest. That would be Ni 62.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 17 at 22:54
$begingroup$
Thank you very much for clarifying!
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 18 at 1:55
$begingroup$
Thank you very much for clarifying!
$endgroup$
– N. Steinle
Mar 18 at 1:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Iron comes from exploding white dwarfs and exploding massive stars(Wikipedia).
(One of many amazing images by Cmglee )
Periodic table showing the cosmogenic origin of each element. Elements from carbon up to sulfur may be made in small stars by the alpha process. Elements beyond iron are made in large stars with slow neutron capture (s-process), followed by expulsion to space in gas ejections (see planetary nebulae). Elements heavier than iron may be made in neutron star mergers or supernovae after the r-process, involving a dense burst of neutrons and rapid capture by the element.
answered Mar 17 at 15:15
Keith McClaryKeith McClary
1,411411
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
While this may answer the question, it is preferable to have the content of the link copied into the post to avoid issues such s link rot, going off-site, etc.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 21:12
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Iron comes from exploding white dwarfs and exploding massive stars(Wikipedia).
(One of many amazing images by Cmglee )
Periodic table showing the cosmogenic origin of each element. Elements from carbon up to sulfur may be made in small stars by the alpha process. Elements beyond iron are made in large stars with slow neutron capture (s-process), followed by expulsion to space in gas ejections (see planetary nebulae). Elements heavier than iron may be made in neutron star mergers or supernovae after the r-process, involving a dense burst of neutrons and rapid capture by the element.
answered Mar 17 at 15:15
Keith McClaryKeith McClary
1,411411
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
While this may answer the question, it is preferable to have the content of the link copied into the post to avoid issues such s link rot, going off-site, etc.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 21:12
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Iron comes from exploding white dwarfs and exploding massive stars(Wikipedia).
(One of many amazing images by Cmglee )
Periodic table showing the cosmogenic origin of each element. Elements from carbon up to sulfur may be made in small stars by the alpha process. Elements beyond iron are made in large stars with slow neutron capture (s-process), followed by expulsion to space in gas ejections (see planetary nebulae). Elements heavier than iron may be made in neutron star mergers or supernovae after the r-process, involving a dense burst of neutrons and rapid capture by the element.
answered Mar 17 at 15:15
Keith McClaryKeith McClary
1,411411
$endgroup$
Iron comes from exploding white dwarfs and exploding massive stars(Wikipedia).
(One of many amazing images by Cmglee )
Periodic table showing the cosmogenic origin of each element. Elements from carbon up to sulfur may be made in small stars by the alpha process. Elements beyond iron are made in large stars with slow neutron capture (s-process), followed by expulsion to space in gas ejections (see planetary nebulae). Elements heavier than iron may be made in neutron star mergers or supernovae after the r-process, involving a dense burst of neutrons and rapid capture by the element.
answered Mar 17 at 15:15
Keith McClaryKeith McClary
1,411411
edited Mar 18 at 6:17
answered Mar 17 at 15:15
Keith McClaryKeith McClary
1,411411
answered Mar 17 at 15:15
Keith McClaryKeith McClary
1,411411
answered Mar 17 at 15:15
Keith McClaryKeith McClary
1,411411
1,411411
2
$begingroup$
While this may answer the question, it is preferable to have the content of the link copied into the post to avoid issues such s link rot, going off-site, etc.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 21:12
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
While this may answer the question, it is preferable to have the content of the link copied into the post to avoid issues such s link rot, going off-site, etc.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 21:12
2
2
$begingroup$
While this may answer the question, it is preferable to have the content of the link copied into the post to avoid issues such s link rot, going off-site, etc.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 21:12
$begingroup$
While this may answer the question, it is preferable to have the content of the link copied into the post to avoid issues such s link rot, going off-site, etc.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 21:12
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Iron is at the minimum point for energy release from fusion. For all atomic numbers less than that of iron, there is a net release of energy as additional protons and neutrons are added. Beyond iron, it's the reverse; energy must be input to fuse protons and neutrons into larger nuclei, which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events and larger nuclei release energy on fission. As long as there are conditions to drive these processes, the tendency will be to build smaller nuclei up to iron and split larger nuclei down toward iron.
answered Mar 18 at 0:03
Anthony XAnthony X
2,78611220
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
True, but not what the Rick is asking about. He's not concerned with how iron is produced, but how it's distributed - that is, how it gets into interstellar space and (eventually) other stars and planets.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:51
$begingroup$
"which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events". Not true.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 18 at 13:34
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Iron is at the minimum point for energy release from fusion. For all atomic numbers less than that of iron, there is a net release of energy as additional protons and neutrons are added. Beyond iron, it's the reverse; energy must be input to fuse protons and neutrons into larger nuclei, which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events and larger nuclei release energy on fission. As long as there are conditions to drive these processes, the tendency will be to build smaller nuclei up to iron and split larger nuclei down toward iron.
answered Mar 18 at 0:03
Anthony XAnthony X
2,78611220
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
True, but not what the Rick is asking about. He's not concerned with how iron is produced, but how it's distributed - that is, how it gets into interstellar space and (eventually) other stars and planets.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:51
$begingroup$
"which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events". Not true.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 18 at 13:34
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Iron is at the minimum point for energy release from fusion. For all atomic numbers less than that of iron, there is a net release of energy as additional protons and neutrons are added. Beyond iron, it's the reverse; energy must be input to fuse protons and neutrons into larger nuclei, which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events and larger nuclei release energy on fission. As long as there are conditions to drive these processes, the tendency will be to build smaller nuclei up to iron and split larger nuclei down toward iron.
answered Mar 18 at 0:03
Anthony XAnthony X
2,78611220
$endgroup$
Iron is at the minimum point for energy release from fusion. For all atomic numbers less than that of iron, there is a net release of energy as additional protons and neutrons are added. Beyond iron, it's the reverse; energy must be input to fuse protons and neutrons into larger nuclei, which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events and larger nuclei release energy on fission. As long as there are conditions to drive these processes, the tendency will be to build smaller nuclei up to iron and split larger nuclei down toward iron.
answered Mar 18 at 0:03
Anthony XAnthony X
2,78611220
answered Mar 18 at 0:03
Anthony XAnthony X
2,78611220
answered Mar 18 at 0:03
Anthony XAnthony X
2,78611220
answered Mar 18 at 0:03
Anthony XAnthony X
2,78611220
2,78611220
2
$begingroup$
True, but not what the Rick is asking about. He's not concerned with how iron is produced, but how it's distributed - that is, how it gets into interstellar space and (eventually) other stars and planets.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:51
$begingroup$
"which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events". Not true.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 18 at 13:34
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
True, but not what the Rick is asking about. He's not concerned with how iron is produced, but how it's distributed - that is, how it gets into interstellar space and (eventually) other stars and planets.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:51
$begingroup$
"which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events". Not true.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 18 at 13:34
2
2
$begingroup$
True, but not what the Rick is asking about. He's not concerned with how iron is produced, but how it's distributed - that is, how it gets into interstellar space and (eventually) other stars and planets.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:51
$begingroup$
True, but not what the Rick is asking about. He's not concerned with how iron is produced, but how it's distributed - that is, how it gets into interstellar space and (eventually) other stars and planets.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:51
$begingroup$
"which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events". Not true.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 18 at 13:34
$begingroup$
"which is why larger nuclei are only formed in supernova-type events". Not true.
$endgroup$
– Rob Jeffries
Mar 18 at 13:34
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The nucleosynthesis in the inner of the stars generates energy: The huge amounts of energy form Helium from hydrogen. The star then start generating carbon from helium and so an. This finishes with iron. To generate with larger atomic numbers the star needs more energy. Most of them are generated in supernovae, where there is a lot more energy.
edited Mar 18 at 5:53
Minijack
1032
answered Mar 17 at 5:46
Uwe PilzUwe Pilz
797
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The nucleosynthesis in the inner of the stars generates energy: The huge amounts of energy form Helium from hydrogen. The star then start generating carbon from helium and so an. This finishes with iron. To generate with larger atomic numbers the star needs more energy. Most of them are generated in supernovae, where there is a lot more energy.
edited Mar 18 at 5:53
Minijack
1032
answered Mar 17 at 5:46
Uwe PilzUwe Pilz
797
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The nucleosynthesis in the inner of the stars generates energy: The huge amounts of energy form Helium from hydrogen. The star then start generating carbon from helium and so an. This finishes with iron. To generate with larger atomic numbers the star needs more energy. Most of them are generated in supernovae, where there is a lot more energy.
edited Mar 18 at 5:53
Minijack
1032
answered Mar 17 at 5:46
Uwe PilzUwe Pilz
797
$endgroup$
The nucleosynthesis in the inner of the stars generates energy: The huge amounts of energy form Helium from hydrogen. The star then start generating carbon from helium and so an. This finishes with iron. To generate with larger atomic numbers the star needs more energy. Most of them are generated in supernovae, where there is a lot more energy.
edited Mar 18 at 5:53
Minijack
1032
answered Mar 17 at 5:46
Uwe PilzUwe Pilz
797
edited Mar 18 at 5:53
Minijack
1032
edited Mar 18 at 5:53
Minijack
1032
edited Mar 18 at 5:53
Minijack
1032
1032
answered Mar 17 at 5:46
Uwe PilzUwe Pilz
797
answered Mar 17 at 5:46
Uwe PilzUwe Pilz
797
answered Mar 17 at 5:46
Uwe PilzUwe Pilz
797
797
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f466889%2fwhy-is-there-so-much-iron%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
11
$begingroup$
Therefore no iron is released. are you sure?
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Mar 17 at 1:47
3
$begingroup$
This table in Wikipedia's "Nucleosynthesis" article might help, detailed here.
$endgroup$
– Nat
Mar 17 at 2:15
2
$begingroup$
I would disagree with you... There is a LOT of iron, almost as much as Oxygen and Carbon (as well as silicon)...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis#/media/…
$endgroup$
– Rick
Mar 17 at 22:47
1
$begingroup$
@Jepsilon Specifically, Ni-62 is the peak. However, iron is easier to produce, so while Ni-62 is (very very slightly) more stable, there's more iron. Binding energy isn't everything - after all, most of the visible matter in the universe is still hydrogen, which is a stable element with (one of?) the highest energy per nucleon.
$endgroup$
– Luaan
Mar 18 at 9:56
1
$begingroup$
Also, type Ia supernovae leave no remnant. Most type Ib and Ic supernovae do leave a remnant, just like most type II supernovae do. (Exceptions are the rare Ib/Ic/II supernovae resulting from pair-production-triggered instability, which leave no remnants.)
$endgroup$
– Sean
Mar 19 at 2:57