Originally posted by goatfish
As for the "not enough energy in the solar system" part, I think he was saying that in solar systems with stars larger than our sun and solar
systems with multiple stars you would find the stable elements with very high atomic numbers occurring naturally. I'm not an astrophysicist but that
sounds somewhat plausible to me.
I'm not either by profession but I have interest in the topic as a hobby, and you don't have to be an
astrophysicist to read this wiki, though being one may help with comprehension?
This includes supernova nucleosynthesis, and produces the elements heavier than iron by an intense burst of nuclear reactions that typically last mere
seconds during the explosion of the supernova core. In explosive environments of supernovae, the elements between silicon and nickel are synthesized
by fast fusion. Also in supernovae further nucleosynthesis processes can occur, such as the r process, in which the most neutron-rich isotopes of
elements heavier than nickel are produced by rapid absorption of free neutrons released during the explosions. It is responsible for our natural
cohort of radioactive elements, such as uranium and thorium, as well as the most neutron-rich isotopes of each heavy element.
is, elements more or less up to Iron are produced in stellar nucleosynthesis, while in general elements above Iron on the periodic table of the
elements are typically produced by supernovae.
Because we find elements heavier than iron on Earth, one can surmise that the Earth and therefore our solar system contains stardust remnants from
previous supernova explosions of other stars, where the heaviest elements were created.
There's nothing I know of in that theory that would support Lazar's contention that "solar systems with multiple stars you would find the stable
elements with very high atomic numbers occurring naturally".
One possibility I've tried to research but found nothing on, is whether unstable elements that have a certain half-life on Earth, can have their
half-life extended as a result of the high pressure in a stellar core. The high temperature would probably tend to make it less stable though, and
probably the reason I can't find much about it is that we have difficulty observing past the photosphere or outer layer of the star, with the
exception of supernovae where we can observe the composition of the star that exploded.
I would guess there are a number of problems trying to observe element 115 in supernova explosions:
1. Ununpentium is so unstable I'm not sure if we even know what spectral lines to look for to identify 115, and
2. We don't always detect supernovae at the instant they occur, and by the time we detect them any element 115 that may have formed in the supernova
might have already decayed because of the extremely short half life. If there was such thing as a stable version of 115 and it was being formed in a
supernova then we should be able to not only observe its spectral lines, but we should also be able to find stable element 115 on Earth because we
obviously have other remnants of supernovae here like Uranium.
In other words, Lazar's claim makes no sense to me at all and doesn't sound the least bit plausible based on what I know about nucleosynthesis.
Earlier in the thread I said if he was a physicist, he's not a very good one. This is an example of what I was referring to, making a claim that
isn't supported by known physics.