Origin of the Solar System: Understanding Hydrogen & Heavy Elements

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the origin of the solar system, specifically addressing the composition of the Sun and the distribution of elements within it. The prevailing theory suggests that the solar system formed from a nebula, remnants of a supernova, which flattened into a disk shape. Despite gravitational forces that should have concentrated heavier elements like iron at the center, the Sun is predominantly composed of hydrogen (91.2% of total atoms) and helium (8.7%). The gas giants also retain significant hydrogen due to their greater gravitational pull, which allows them to hold onto lighter elements that the inner rocky planets lost over time.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of nebular theory in astrophysics
  • Familiarity with elemental composition and atomic percentages
  • Knowledge of gravitational forces in celestial formation
  • Basic concepts of solar wind and its effects on planetary atmospheres
NEXT STEPS
  • Research "nebular hypothesis" and its implications for solar system formation
  • Study "solar wind" and its impact on planetary atmospheres
  • Explore "elemental distribution in stars" for deeper insights into stellar composition
  • Investigate "gas giant formation" and the role of gravity in retaining lighter elements
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, astrophysics students, and anyone interested in the formation and composition of celestial bodies in the solar system.

johnmtb
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Dear All,I understand that one of the most popular theories concerning the origin of the solar system begins with cloud of gas and dust (called a nebula), assumed to be the remnants of a supernova; in order to explain elements such as iron and above.That this nebula begins to flatten into a spinning pancake shape with a bulge at the center, with the bulge forming the sun and with the various planets condensing out of the rest of the pancake. All of this I can understand and accept.However, why is the sun composed mostly of hydrogen and not the denser elements such as iron and above, which should have headed to the center of the solar system, due to gravitational forces, the same way they did when Earth condensed?Is there any theory on why the sun does not contain the heavy elements and the planets the gaseous elements or or gas molecules?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
There simply is a lot more hydrogen than everything else - a LOT more.
Not only the Sun, but the gas giant planets are predominantly hydrogen.
The sun probably does contain minute traces of heavier elements.
 
johnmtb said:
Dear All,I understand that one of the most popular theories concerning the origin of the solar system begins with cloud of gas and dust (called a nebula), assumed to be the remnants of a supernova; in order to explain elements such as iron and above.That this nebula begins to flatten into a spinning pancake shape with a bulge at the center, with the bulge forming the sun and with the various planets condensing out of the rest of the pancake. All of this I can understand and accept.However, why is the sun composed mostly of hydrogen and not the denser elements such as iron and above, which should have headed to the center of the solar system, due to gravitational forces, the same way they did when Earth condensed?Is there any theory on why the sun does not contain the heavy elements and the planets the gaseous elements or or gas molecules?

http://chemistry.about.com/od/geochemistry/a/sunelements.htm

From above:
Elements in the Sun

Element % of total atoms % of total mass
Hydrogen 91.2 71.0
Helium 8.7 27.1
Oxygen 0.078 0.97
Carbon 0.043 0.40
Nitrogen 0.0088 0.096
Silicon 0.0045 0.099
Magnesium 0.0038 0.076
Neon 0.0035 0.058
Iron 0.030 0.014
Sulfur 0.015 0.040
 
thank you mathman, but it still does not explain why the earth, at least, has so much iron, etc., or why when we go beyond Mars we run into the gas giants.

gravity forces in the original nebula should have brought all of the heavy elements to the centre of the solar system, while it was still in the particulate stage.
 
johnmtb said:
gravity forces in the original nebula should have brought all of the heavy elements t

Not if they are in orbit. The same argument can be applied to the Earth today, right?
 
johnmtb said:
thank you mathman, but it still does not explain why the earth, at least, has so much iron, etc., or why when we go beyond Mars we run into the gas giants.
The rocky inner planets probably did have thicker atmosphere including a lot of hydrogen in the earliest stages of formation.
Free hydrogen though, being very light is easily pushed away over time by solar wind leaving the remaining 10% of heavier material to agglomerate.
In the case of gas giants, their much greater gravity enabled them to hold on to more of the initial hydrogen
 
Guys,

thank you all for your responses. however, I am still not certain that the question has been answered. I shall always feel that there is something amiss with the current theory.
 
  • #10
In a sense what you are saying is 'why are there planets?, why didn't everything simply just collapse into a central star?
Well in fact most of the nebula, over 99% of it, did just that.
The planets and other smaller bodies formed from relatively small localised eddies of matter within the broadly collapsing disk of material.
 
  • #11
rootone,

maybe that is the answer. assuming that the heavier elements were homogenous in the original nebula, and mercury, venus, Earth and Mars are only more dense because the lighter elements have been blown away by the sun.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K