The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Could cosmic microwave background radiation actually light from stars?  (Read 2069 times)

Offline micron98

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Hi,
I am strong math guy nor come from physics or cosmology background so please don't ask me for proof in math :D
This is just what I imagine universe.

I believe that what we call big bang which created our current universe is actually death of another much much bigger star or something.
And this big star is just another star in the universe and there are many more like that.
biggest star or galaxy might be just small dust to the actual size of the universe which is infinite.

Could cosmic microwave background radiation actually light from very distant big stars?
« Last Edit: 14/06/2014 15:05:09 by JP »


 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2760
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Quote from: micron98
Hi,
I am strong math guy nor come from physics or cosmology background so please don't ask me for proof in math :D
This is just what I imagine universe.

I believe that what we call big bang which created our current universe is actually death of another much much bigger star or something.
And this big star is just another star in the universe and there are many more like that.
biggest star or galaxy might be just small dust to the actual size of the universe which is infinite.

Could cosmic microwave background radiation actually light from very distant big stars?
Your theory is impossible. The big bang theory comes from the deduction that galaxies is moving away from each other. It is impossible that the observations we attribute to the big bang could have come from a star, no matter how big that star is. In fact if a star is too big it collapses into a black hole. That means that there is a limit to the size at which a star can explode.

And besides. There was no explosion or any "bang" in the big bang theory. That's a misnomer.
 

Offline micron98

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Quote from: micron98
Hi,
I am strong math guy nor come from physics or cosmology background so please don't ask me for proof in math :D
This is just what I imagine universe.

I believe that what we call big bang which created our current universe is actually death of another much much bigger star or something.
And this big star is just another star in the universe and there are many more like that.
biggest star or galaxy might be just small dust to the actual size of the universe which is infinite.

Could cosmic microwave background radiation actually light from very distant big stars?
In fact if a star is too big it collapses into a black hole. That means that there is a limit to the size at which a star can explode.

Could it be something else? A giant black hole perhaps decided to break apart? Or is this completely impossible or we don't know this yet?

Reason I was saying star is, I thought it is only capable of creating various elements and act as nutrition for other star formation after its death.

 

Offline evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4105
  • Thanked: 245 times
    • View Profile
Quote
a star is...capable of creating various elements and act as nutrition for other star formation after its death

It is thought that the Big Bang produced mostly hydrogen (92% of atoms), Helium (8% of atoms) and a vanishingly small amount of Lithium. These are based on astronomical observations and calculations, and assume initial temperatures around 100 billion degrees, far hotter than occurs in stars.

It is believed that the heavier elements up to iron formed in stars, as you indicate, and are scattered into space when those stars explode. Elements slightly heavier than iron are thought to have formed in supernova events,  while the really heavy elements like gold and uranium are thought to form in collisions of neutron stars.

But that leaves the bulk of matter in the Solar System and the universe (hydrogen and helium) being formed in the initial big bang, with just a small mixture of heavier elements from the explosion or collision of earlier generations of stars.

 

Offline micron98

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
But that leaves the bulk of matter in the Solar System and the universe (hydrogen and helium) being formed in the initial big bang, with just a small mixture of heavier elements from the explosion or collision of earlier

Thanks Evan for detailed explanation. I felt like I read a 100page book after reading your lines.  I must say, you are very knowledgeable.

Another question Evan. Following your information,

if speed that heavy atoms break into smaller atoms is slower than creation of heavier atoms in the stars, this universe would eventually end up with heavy elements. Is there a mechanism preventing this?

Or if this could happen, does it mean that a new type of star is even possible with only the heavy elements? And could it explode into light elements?
 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2760
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Quote from: micron98
Could it be something else?
It has to be something else. But it can't be anything like you're thinking. You keep thinking that the Big Bang was a conventional explosion like you're thinking. All of the galaxies in the entire universe are rushing away from each other. No conventional explosion that can do this is conceivable, never mind possible.

Quote from: micron98
A giant black hole perhaps decided to break apart?
No. Itís quite literally impossible for any black hole to break apart,

Quote from: micron98
Or is this completely impossible or we don't know this yet?
Correct. Why do you keep thinking that the big bang was a conventional explosion like a super nova or something?
 

Offline evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4105
  • Thanked: 245 times
    • View Profile
Quote
speed that heavy atoms break into smaller atoms
All known heavy atoms like Uranium (element 92) and Plutonium (element 94) and above are radioactive, and eventually break down into lighter elements - this is called nuclear fission. This breakdown can take a long time (about 4 billion years, in the case of Uranium) or a short time (less than a millionth of a second for elements above 100).

Most atoms smaller than Uranium have at least one stable isotope, and will persist in the Earth as long as the Earth survives.
Quote
is slower than creation of heavier atoms in the stars
Stars get most of their energy from combining light elements into heavier elements - this is called nuclear fusion (plus a bit of energy from gravitational collapse). But nuclear fusion only releases energy when forming elements up to iron (element 26). It has been noticed that the abundance of iron in the Earth is a bit higher than nearby elements, suggesting that the Solar System was formed from the ashes of some older, large stars that had exploded.

Quote
this universe would eventually end up with heavy elements. Is there a mechanism preventing this?
Beyond iron, fusion actually absorbs energy, as shown by the graph here. This means that stars will not produce significant amounts of elements beyond iron (a small amount is produced in the furnace of a supernova explosion).

Lighter stars, such as our Sun do not have enough mass to create the immense pressures and temperatures to create elements heavier than Helium. This group of stars is thought to make up over 80% of stars. So it is expected that a large amount of lighter elements will persist in the universe, although it is locked up in the intense gravity of a white dwarf star.

Stars more than about 8 times heavier than our Sun are likely to collapse into a neutron star or black hole, and it is a bit meaningless to talk about what elements they are composed of...
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums