You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Nornagest comments on 12-year old challenges the Big Bang - Less Wrong Discussion

1 [deleted] 29 March 2011 05:40AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (42)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Nornagest 29 March 2011 05:13:49PM 6 points [-]

Can someone explain how elements are generally modeled to have formed from the big bang? And is there anything that it Jacob may be missing in the current literature?

Yep. Jacob's quite right about nucleosynthesis in the Big Bang, but that's not even close to the only nucleosynthesis pathway out there.

First-generation stars (called "Population III", confusingly) are thought to have contained almost no elements heavier than helium, which may have allowed them to stably reach much higher masses than the current generation can manage. Mid-weight elements up to the mass of iron are formed through one of the several fantastically complicated fusion processes which occur as older stars deplete their fusible hydrogen and start accumulating helium in their cores; carbon in particular is generated mainly through the triple-alpha process. Elements heavier than iron don't release energy when fused, so stars can't produce them in quantity; they're instead produced mainly by fusion events during the early stages of a supernova.