New Foxtel Series: "How The Universe Works."

[Suzy]

I haven't watched the "Black Holes" episode yet, but will do tonight.

Regarding the "Stars" episode, finally (after watching many astro docos), hubby and I finally found out how gold is formed from supernova bursts when they explained and showed it through graphics. I kept playing this part over and over again.

I'm glad to see Michelle Thaller and Kaku involved in this series as I enjoy their presentations. I enjoy Michelle's enthusiasm and as for Kaku, I can listen to him all day. Michelle's been busy lately, seems she's been everywhere -"The Universe" (later series), The Known Universe, and now this current new series.

Craig, I am thoroughly enjoying your feedback from these episodes - thank you.

Next week's episode is on the Big Bang.

[renormalised (Carl)]

R process....that's what forms gold and other elements heavier than iron/nickel in supernova explosions

[CraigS]

Suzy;
If you're really interested, have a look at Wikipedia Stellar nucleosynthesis.

Gold (atomic mass = 196), is heavier than Iron (atomic mass = 56), so follow the R-process and S-process links. (These are the two processes which result in the creation of elements heavier than Iron, like Gold).

The R-process is a nucleosynthesis process, likely occurring in core-collapse supernovae and is responsible for for about 50% of atomic nuclei heavier than Iron and works by slow neutron capture. It occurs mainly in "Asymptotic giant branch" stars (AGB) - a fancy term for low-to-medium mass stars.

The other 50%, is coutesy of the S-process. It differs from the more rapid R-process of neutron-capture, because of its slower capture rate. It also occurs in AGB stars at relatively lower neutron densities and intermediate temperature conditions inside the star.

The R-process is believed to occur over time scales of seconds in explosive environments, the S-process is believed to occur over time scales of thousands of years.

Interesting to think of it this way, next time you look at that jewellery, huh?
(I may have just saved hubby some money on future anniversaries ! .. Err .. at least that was my intention).



Cheers & Rgds

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by CraigS

Suzy;
If you're really interested, have a look at Wikipedia Stellar nucleosynthesis.

Gold (atomic mass = 196), is heavier than Iron (atomic mass = 56), so follow the R-process and S-process links. (These are the two processes which result in the creation of elements heavier than Iron, like Gold).

The R-process is a nucleosynthesis process, likely occurring in core-collapse supernovae and is responsible for for about 50% of atomic nuclei heavier than Iron and works by slow neutron capture. It occurs mainly in "Asymptotic giant branch" stars (AGB) - a fancy term for low-to-medium mass stars.



Cheers & Rgds

No....rapid neutron capture, core collapse supernovae

AGB's are a very specific stage in the evolution of giant stars. AGB stage is the second climb to gianthood for stars that occurs after the helium flash within the cores of the stars. It's also the stage where the stars reach maximum size and luminosity just before they become unstable and start to puff off their outer layers to become planetary nebs. This starts to occur once the stars build up enough carbon and oxygen ash in their cores to shutdown the nuclear reactions there. Then the helium burning moves out into a shell around the core, along with hydrogen burning as well.

It's the S process which occurs in AGB's. It's where you get elements like fluorine, chlorine, silicon etc, forming. Most of the heavier trans Fe elements forming in the S process are things like Te, Ce, Bi, Pb etc.

[CraigS]

Originally Posted by renormalised

No....rapid neutron capture, core collapse supernovae

AGB's are a very specific stage in the evolution of giant stars. AGB stage is the second climb to gianthood for stars that occurs after the helium flash within the cores of the stars. It's also the stage where the stars reach maximum size and luminosity just before they become unstable and start to puff off their outer layers to become planetary nebs. This starts to occur once the stars build up enough carbon and oxygen ash in their cores to shutdown the nuclear reactions there. Then the helium burning moves out into a shell around the core, along with hydrogen burning as well.

It's the S process which occurs in AGB's. It's where you get elements like fluorine, chlorine, silicon etc, forming. Most of the heavier trans Fe elements forming in the S process are things like Te, Ce, Bi, Pb etc.

Correct !!
A cut & paste error ...

As Bert says, "I always leave some rope lying around to jump up and lynch unwary onlookers with !"

(Pretty weak excuse to quote from others because of my mistake, huh ?).



Cheers

[renormalised (Carl)]

I left the knot loose

[Suzy]

Thank you Craig & Carl for that very informative reading. Craig, thank you for those links, I will read them later today.

And Craig, you must have read my mind, because I have been wondering how long it takes for gold fusion to take place. Seconds - wow. It did look very quick on the graphics as shown in the series.

Also, I have been looking to no avail to find a book on stars (the physics side) and will start a thread in this section soon. Hope you'll can help me out. Don't answer here, please wait for thread

Originally Posted by CraigS

Interesting to think of it this way, next time you look at that jewellery, huh?
(I may have just saved hubby some money on future anniversaries ! .. Err .. at least that was my intention).

Cheers & Rgds

I'm afraid to say that it just makes me want that gold even more, Craig. . Nothing under Sovereign please.
As for gold from hubby, I have to wait another 25 years of marriage to get paid off in gold, be a nice change from paper, wood and tin anyway. 50 years service in a marriage- I'd be wanting a hell of a lot gold. Hmmm.. though in 2 years, I will actually hit silver, finally, something that won't break, tear or corrode. Time for me to go and design some jewellery I think...

[renormalised (Carl)]

Ya too slow, Suzy

Just posted a thread for you

[Jen]

yes im loving this series too the graphics are awsome

[CraigS]

Ok. Just watched "Big Bang". Not bad, but I found it a little bit repetitive. "Stars" still wins out, in my view.

- Absolutely awesome graphics with 3D zoom ins & outs of Nebulae etc. Great colours. Full marks to them for this.
- Kaku had all the lines in this one: "The Big Bang is the Holy Grail of Physics" .. (chuckle, chuckle).
- Even managed to squeeze in Hawking this time, (on God .. what else?), alongside the regulars .. Krauss, Janna Levin, Carlos Frenk, etc.
- Difficult topic to cover as it is mostly theoretical.
- Hubble expansion, Penzias & Wilson, COBE & WMAP data gets a mention.
- Touched on the concept of 'something from nothing'. I would have liked to hear more on this.
- Inflation greater than lightspeed from the outset, touched on.
- Energy/matter conversion, matter/antimatter, Chaos at the outset.
- CERN/LHC got a mention - big beastie, mind-blowing machine this one !
- Kaku: "We are the leftovers of the Big Bang" … what a cack !!
- Density fluctuations thru to co-elescing gas model of galaxy formation;
- Dark energy mentioned (no dark matter, interestingly)
- Kaku quoting Woody Allen (as a philosopher): "Eternity is a really long time .. especially the end". What a corker !
- Really liked the zoom-ins & outs of Kaku in Central Park, NY.

I'm enjoying it .. not as much depth as I'd hoped for .. but that's probably just me.

Whaddya reckon, Suzy ?

Cheers & Rgds
PS: No gold in this one for you, Suzy

[AdrianF (Adrian)]

I have just watched the first(?) episode "The Big Bang" nice show. I will watch the rest of the shows when I get time.
Still trying to get my head around "The Big Bang" starting the Universe from absolutely nothing to what it is today.

Adrian

[CraigS]

Originally Posted by AdrianF

I have just watched the first(?) episode "The Big Bang" nice show. I will watch the rest of the shows when I get time.
Still trying to get my head around "The Big Bang" starting the Universe from absolutely nothing to what it is today.

Adrian

Hi Adrian;

Pretty cool stuff, eh ?

Remember its all based on a theory of 'best fit' (compared with other theories). In many areas, it explains the majority of available evidence and makes some observable, and not-yet-observable predictions.

It doesn't have to be 'true' … even though that is very often, the way it is presented.

Cheer & Rgds.

[renormalised (Carl)]

It doesn't have to be 'true' … even though that is very often, the way it is presented.

It's like they say..."You don't let the facts get in the way of the truth".

What is, and what is the truth are two entirely different things.

[Suzy]

Adrian, glad you're enjoying the show. "Stars" was the first episode, and "Black Holes" was the second.

Craig, as usual you have given a terrific account of the show. Thank you.

I have to agree with you. "Stars" is by far the best. "Black Holes had quite a bit of "what if's" and then drama on the outcomes of those "what ifs". I get impatient (so does hubby) when shows do that. The Universe started doing plenty of that towards later series and it drove me bonkers because I wasn't actually learning anything. I still enjoy the Universe series though (whilst my fingers are in ears and my eyes are shut during those segments). Despite this show doing it too, I still found it enjoyable and THE GRAPHICS are incredible.

I haven't watched "The Big Bang" episode yet. Will watch it tonight.

Next episode is titled "Galaxies". I hope Michelle Thaller will be in this one. Just love her enthusiasm.

[AdrianF (Adrian)]

Thanks Suzy someone gave me a birthday present, a DVD of series 1 on it and I just went in order on the DVD.

Adrian

[renormalised (Carl)]

Well, I hate to tell you all this but most of what you'll learn is "what if". You'll have to get used to this because that is precisely what science is about.

[CraigS]

I think the 'what ifs' Suzy is referring to are mostly the over-dramatised 'threats from outer space' style stuff they add in to US audience targetted documentaries … supposedly to keep you on the edge of your chair.

I find this style annoying, too. The History Channel "The Universe" was full of this kind of material. As I mentioned before, the best Episode, I found, was the last one from Season One: 'Beyond The Big Bang'. Mainly because it didn't contain any of this type of hype. 'Twas just the historical facts. Left me feeling quite light, yet grounded.

Cheers

[Suzy]

Precisely Craig, thanks for explaining clearly to Carl. Your explanation is spot on with what I was talking about.

I should have explained it better Carl, apologies. Most people that have watched the Universe shows to the end of the series would know what I am talking about though. But I should have made it clear to those that haven't.

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by CraigS

I think the 'what ifs' Suzy is referring to are mostly the over-dramatised 'threats from outer space' style stuff they add in to US audience targetted documentaries … supposedly to keep you on the edge of your chair.

I find this style annoying, too. The History Channel "The Universe" was full of this kind of material. As I mentioned before, the best Episode, I found, was the last one from Season One: 'Beyond The Big Bang'. Mainly because it didn't contain any of this type of hype. 'Twas just the historical facts. Left me feeling quite light, yet grounded.

Cheers

That's why I don't really like a lot of the US stuff...it's too superficial despite the content.

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by Suzy

Precisely Craig, thanks for explaining clearly to Carl. Your explanation is spot on with what I was talking about.

I should have explained it better Carl, apologies. Most people that have watched the Universe shows to the end of the series would know what I am talking about though. But I should have made it clear to those that haven't.

I've seen the series several times myself. I know what you meant, but I also added what I did because others would see what you said as meaning the usual "what if" as a legitimate question, not as something to add some dramatic license to a doco'.