Is it true that our Sun is the second generation star?

[CaptainCanad]

That before our Sun there was a more massive star in it's place.<br /><br />My question is that since stars are created in giant molacular clouds, how come we can't see the dense gas around our solar system?

 

[thalion]

Referring to "generations" of stars doesn't literally mean a succession, but the change in the composition and dynamics of stars as galaxies became more enriched with "metals" with each new batch of stars that came and went. <br /><br />A simplified example:<br /><br />First generation stars: Stars with zero elements heavier than helium (metals), or "Population III". Short-lived, massive stars that are presumably all long gone.<br /><br />Second generation stars: Stars slightly more enriched with elements produced by the supernovae of FG stars, but still much more metal-poor than our Sun.<br /><br />Third generation stars: Still more metal-rich stars than SG stars...<br /><br />And so on.<br /><br />To recap:<br />I've sometimes heard our Sun called a "third generation" star, myself. This doesn't mean that there was literally another star before, but only that the Sun formed after a long succession of supernovae had enriched the interstellar medium.

 

[MeteorWayne]

A more massive star was not in it's place, but rather "in the neigborhood". That supernova was the likely shock event which induced the formation and collapse of the molecular cloud that created the sun.<br /><br />In fact our solar system in now orbiting the galaxy in a rather rarefied bubble. The cloud of dense gas that created the solar system has been sucked up by the gravity of our system, or should I say it was, 4.5 billion years ago. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[tygerxg2]

Another question:<br /><br />If the stars in the edge of our galaxy are moving at a similar velocity as the inner stars because of dark matter, than how come that doesn't apply to the planets in our solar system?

 

[MeteorWayne]

Because the concentration of dark matter in the solar system is too low to create a measurable effect at our current level of precision. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[search]

Hello TygerXG2<br /><br />Regarding your post question:<br /><font color="yellow">Is it true that our Sun is the second generation star?<br /><br />That before our Sun there was a more massive star in it's place.</font><br /><br />From:LINK<br /><br />The Sun is actually a Population I star. Meaning a young star with high metallicity and therefore a third generation star.<br /><br />"When the universe first formed (according to the big bang theory), it consisted almost entirely of hydrogen which, through primordial nucleosynthesis, created a sizeable proportion of helium and only trace amounts of lithium. The first stars, referred to as:"<br /><br />Population III - ", had virtually no metals at all. These stars were incredibly massive and, during their lives, created the elements up to iron on the periodic table via nucleosynthesis. They subsequently died in spectacular supernovae which dispersed those elements throughout the universe." (non has been found yet but HE 0107-5240 (consist virtually only of hydrogen and helium) is the record holder (as far as I could find out) and a serious candidate.<br /><br />Population II -"The next generation of stars was born out of those materials left by the death of the first. The oldest observed stars, known as Population II stars, have very low metallicities;[2] as subsequent generations of stars were born, they became more metal-enriched as the gaseous clouds from which they formed received the metal-rich dust manufactured by previous generations. As those stars died, they returned metal-enriched material to the interstellar medium via planetary nebulae and supernovae, enriching the nebulae out of which the newer stars formed even further."<br /><br />Population I - "including the Sun, therefore have the highest metal content"<br /><br />Regarding:<br /><font color="yellow"> My qu</font>

 

[MeteorWayne]

SEARCH....<br /><br />Where the heck do you get all this stuff?<br /><br />You are one of the most aptly named SDCers.<br /><br />I am astounded by your resouces.<br /><br />Please PM me ALL your links!!!!!<br /><br />Thanx,<br /><br />MW <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[spacester]

The google and he are as one. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[scepterium]

"The google and he are as one"<br /><br />As we are all!