4 ms·

Basic life (single-celled?) requiring the elements above lead might have a chance at that time, but complex life like us wouldn't do so well if there were still

Basic life (single-celled?) requiring the elements above lead might have a chance at that time, but complex life like us wouldn't do so well if there were still supernovas going off left and right. There's a theory with decent evidence that at least one of the mass extinctions was caused by a supernova: https://www.space.com/supernova-caused-earth-mass-extinction-devonian.html https://www.space.com/supernova-caused-earth-mass-extinction... That being said, I wasn't aware of how LIGO changed the understanding of how heavier elements are usually formed, guessing it changed the expected neutron star prevalence? Do you have any additional reading on that?

marcyb5st 4y ago
You are right about supernova hampering life evolution, but it's unclear how long the fireworks lasted. In my comment I argued that it is possible to have the conditions of life emerge much earlier than 13.5 billion years. Not that it necessarily happened. Regarding the second point have a look at https://www.ligo.org/science/Publication-GW170817Kilonova/index.php https://www.ligo.org/science/Publication-GW170817Kilonova/in... . That isn't my field of specialization, so I am not sure about recent publications. At the time though this was a big deal as kilonovas seem to be the primary source of heavy nuclei in the universe. That particular event crested between 1/100th to 1/1000th solar masses worth of heavy ( heavier than iron) nuclei. This is a greater rate than supernovas estimations.
kubanczyk 4y ago
> how LIGO changed the understanding of how heavier elements are usually formed, guessing it changed the expected neutron star prevalence? It's not about the prevalence, but about the light curves observed during the event AT 2017gfo. They indicate significant heavy metal ejection but, what's interesting, also production. > mergers of neutron stars contribute to rapid neutron capture (r-process) nucleosynthesis These two articles cite the relevant papers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GW170817#Scientific_importance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GW170817#Scientific_importance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis#Neutron_star_collision https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis#Neutron_star_c...

marcyb5st 4y ago

You are right about supernova hampering life evolution, but it's unclear how long the fireworks lasted. In my comment I argued that it is possible to have the conditions of life emerge much earlier than 13.5 billion years. Not that it necessarily happened. Regarding the second point have a look at https://www.ligo.org/science/Publication-GW170817Kilonova/index.php https://www.ligo.org/science/Publication-GW170817Kilonova/in... . That isn't my field of specialization, so I am not sure about recent publications. At the time though this was a big deal as kilonovas seem to be the primary source of heavy nuclei in the universe. That particular event crested between 1/100th to 1/1000th solar masses worth of heavy ( heavier than iron) nuclei. This is a greater rate than supernovas estimations.

kubanczyk 4y ago

> how LIGO changed the understanding of how heavier elements are usually formed, guessing it changed the expected neutron star prevalence? It's not about the prevalence, but about the light curves observed during the event AT 2017gfo. They indicate significant heavy metal ejection but, what's interesting, also production. > mergers of neutron stars contribute to rapid neutron capture (r-process) nucleosynthesis These two articles cite the relevant papers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GW170817#Scientific_importance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GW170817#Scientific_importance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis#Neutron_star_collision https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis#Neutron_star_c...