It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How could a super nova create a planet?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Ok... I have something to say about the planets. I don't know much about this subject but my reasoning questions whether or not a perfectly round planet of the sizes we see in outer space can be created by a super nova. I've been wondering about this for a while now.

Somebody give me some facts about how planets are created. Gravity? I don't suppose so.

But really if so... Help me out.

I'm still trying to remember my communications studies and I won't be structuralizing this subject for sometime now.

Knowledge of this is needed.




posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by RevelationsDivad
 



Supernova > explosion > star stuff > gravity compresses > new stars/planets(depending on the composition).



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   
following the truth aupciis...

It would appear some questions seek to measure accuracy, and so this would be a CREATOR Creation question




posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by RevelationsDivad
 


Under current models of astrophysics, the imploding/exploding star creates all elements heavier than carbon through violent nuclear fusion.

So after a supernova you've got bits and chunks of iron nickel, lead, gold, uranium floating in space. How they all coalesce with a bunch of free hydrogen is less clear, but it's thought that a single ripple in the material is enough to nucleate a new star and solar system with it.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:59 AM
link   
accretion i think is the way planets are formed after a super nova



and


edit on 9/7/2013 by maryhinge because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:03 AM
link   
No one knows for sure…

No matter how hard you try you can’t glue together dust and stones let alone creating planets..

We have tons of theories but In realty.. (they are just theories).



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Prof Brian Cox gives it a good explanation..its basically gravity and conservation of angular momentum inside a nebula which was given a kick start by a dying supernova




posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by RevelationsDivad
 


The best answer I Can give is that a supernova can not create a planet but what it does that is very important for any planet to exist is to distribute the remains of the giant star that became the supernova into deep space were it forms what is called a nebulae.

In the earliest stars it is hypothesised (they think) that there was only hydrogen and those stars were very big and tightly packed in the early universe, because they were so big they were short lived and blew up in supernovas, now why is this important, well in a star hydrogen is squeezed together under pressure into helium and this releases energy and light, as the star grows older it starts to squeeze the helium together and this forms heavier and heavier elements, en.wikipedia.org...
eriodic_table.svg
Now this of course means that without the star exploding all those elements would be trapped in it's burned out core or it would become so heavy it would eventually become a black hole.

The Nebulae I mentioned earlier are important because under the force of gravity and electrostatic attraction these heavier particles begin to slowly clump together and over time like a ice particle in a snow cloud they get bigger until at last they form small rocks and these start to fall together until an object with sufficient gravity to attract an atmosphere is formed, now it can continue to form until it becomes a star but when it does it actually start to blow the nebulae away from itself and only any items that have formed in the nebulae that are in orbit will remain as long as they are large enough for the solar wind not to blow them away.

In essence when they say we are all made of star dust it is true, we are made of the very stuff the stars turned the hydrogen into.
edit on 9-7-2013 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:42 AM
link   
I happen to believe in what Sleeper shares, that the stars birth the planets, and all the planets are from our star, and that planets birth the moons.

But a supernova, bathes a solar system and star in its elements, adding new potentials for life forms and genetic coding and elements.

For example one of the debates a while ago about whether or not we were from the milky way, or the sagitarius galaxy that is currently being absorbed by the milky way.

The milky way is rich in iron, I believe. The line where this so called "cannabilism" is taking place is not too far from our solar system, and Barnard's star is on our side of it and it lacks some of the Milky Way stars elements and is older than the Milky Way stars. I was reading this on a physics forum where there was a debate.

Our star if Sag, would not have some of the elements of the Milky Way Stars, however. We could be an anomaly.

For several super novas took place from milky way stars that bathed our system in new elements. And they were picked by studying the strata layers of earth.

I found the whole debate interesting.

Now if you research stars, you find stars can jet out water. There is water around our sun, or the elements that make water.

The sun is the Mother of the solar system and all things come from the Sun.

edit on 9-7-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 11:52 AM
link   
A little known fact is that when a star explodes, it releases 99% of all elements. This matter can then go on to coalease and create new planets over time.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by InverseLookingGlass
Under current models of astrophysics, the imploding/exploding star creates all elements heavier than carbon through violent nuclear fusion.
The lowest mass stars don't produce anything heavier than helium, and the highest mass stars can produce iron in stellar fusion, so I don't know where you got this idea about carbon. See this graphic showing elements heavier than carbon in the red giant star:

en.wikipedia.org...

It can even produce some elements heavier than iron like lead, not through nuclear fusion but through the S-process, though not uranium which can only be produced in a supernova.

This is why the uranium on Earth is thought to have come from a Supernova.

However, it's not essential that a supernova occur to create any planet, only those planets with elements as heavy as uranium. There could be some gas giant planets created from mostly hydrogen and helium that don't have any uranium in them or other supernova remnants.


Originally posted by RevelationsDivad
Somebody give me some facts about how planets are created. Gravity? I don't suppose so.
What makes you doubt this? Gravity pulls things together and planets are accumulations of things that have been pulled together. Seems logical to me.
edit on 9-7-2013 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by InverseLookingGlass
reply to post by RevelationsDivad
 


Under current models of astrophysics, the imploding/exploding star creates all elements heavier than carbon through violent nuclear fusion.

So after a supernova you've got bits and chunks of iron nickel, lead, gold, uranium floating in space. How they all coalesce with a bunch of free hydrogen is less clear, but it's thought that a single ripple in the material is enough to nucleate a new star and solar system with it.


If you've ever had a thunderstorm directly above you, it only takes a single thunderclap to create a shockwave strong enough to pass through the cloud and force water molecules together to form raindrops. Same thing can happen with passenger aircraft flying overhead. The rumbling of the engines plus the soot is enough to allow rain to form.



posted on Jul, 11 2013 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Gravity.

One of the Nasa zero-g experiments they did was with very small particles like sugar.It showed that the stuff would almost instantly be attracted to each other until made one big clump.



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 08:23 AM
link   
Thanks guys for the solutions, I'm going to study all this information. I'd like to add it to my reception. Reception of this area (subject) I mean.



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 09:07 AM
link   
I believe stars birth planets. But supernova's bathe systems with added elements, some of those elements.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join