Can a Supernova Core Reignite as a Smaller Star?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the hypothesis that a supernova core could reignite as a smaller star by accreting material from its surroundings. While it's acknowledged that supernovae create heavy elements essential for planetary formation, the consensus is that the violent nature of a supernova would likely prevent the core from accumulating enough gas to reignite. Instead, remnants of a supernova typically result in neutron stars or black holes, not stable smaller stars. Binary star systems present a different scenario, where a white dwarf can accumulate mass from a companion star and potentially reignite. Overall, the idea of a supernova core becoming a smaller star lacks supporting evidence and is considered unlikely.
RedAether
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I know the general accepted theory to the birth of our solar system. One or more nearby stars went supernova and the shock waves caused our gas cloud to collapse forming our solar system. However, i wanted an opinion from those with more knowledge on a hypothesis that seems to make some sense to me.

Could it be possible for a large star to go supernova/nova, and then the remaining core to accrete a new atmosphere from the remains and reignite as a smaller, more stable star? It would seem to me that it would be difficult for our solar system to accumulate the heavy elements that we have just from accepting blown out bits from nearby supernovas. However, if a star underwent a smallish nova early in life and then reignited as a smaller star there would be plenty of material for rocky planet formation like we have now.

Thoughts? I could easily be way off, and would really appreciate any critical comments.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
RedAether said:
One or more nearby stars went supernova and the shock waves caused our gas cloud to collapse forming our solar system.
I don't think the SN is necessary for the gas cloud to collapse - gas clouds pretty much collapse anyway. A lot of the SN theories were the idea that there was something rare and special needed to create our solar system - often promoted by people with a certain creation myth. We now know that solar systems and planets are very common.

Could it be possible for a large star to go supernova/nova, and then the remaining core to accrete a new atmosphere from the remains and reignite as a smaller, more stable star?
A SN is pretty violent. A large star will create a black hole, a smaller progenitor creates a neutron star. There is a class of giant stars that escape the SN fate by expelling a large part of their atmosphere late in their life and ending up as smaller cooler dwarfs


It would seem to me that it would be difficult for our solar system to accumulate the heavy elements that we have just from accepting blown out bits from nearby supernovas.
The early stars in the galaxy were massive low metal stars with very short lives (few 100Myr) that went SN. There were many generations of these before metal rich stars like our sun were formed.

Remember you only need a SN for elements heavier than iron - regular large stars produce the carbon,oxygen, silicon, magnesium that our planet is made from
 
Thanks for the reply. I guess I would like to clarify my basic question. I do understand that SNs create nearly all of the heavy elements, and that before our sun was born many generations of young stars died violent deaths creating a bunch of heavy elements.

However, what i am really trying to get at is this: Is it possible that our sun (or any similar metal rich star like our own) is a direct remnant from a previous small nova event? Or would even a small nova prevent (or destroy) planetary formation around that star?
 
The current model of stellar birth is fairly peaceful (you know besides all the accretion disks and fusion ignition going on). Is there any evidence (for or against) small stellar explosions early in their life cycles?
 
Is it possible that our sun (or any similar metal rich star like our own) is a direct remnant from a previous small nova event?
Read up on nova events.
Those happen if you "accrete a new atmosphere [...] and reignite". What you get is not really "a smaller, more stable star". You get a nova.
 
I don't think the left-over core of a supernova can accumulate enough gas from the explosion remnants to fully reignite - the explosion would have blown them too far away.

However, with binary star systems, it is strongly believed that if one star dies and leaves behind a white dwarf, it can accumulate mass from the other star and then reignite. There are many different versions of this scenario, involving different stellar pairings in the binary, all of which would act differently, I think one combination is believed to be responsible for gamma ray bursts, I think one of the stars has to be a neutron star and the other a red giant, but I don't know for sure.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...

Similar threads

Back
Top