Herschel Opens Its Infrared Eyes

HETEROGENEOUS MATERIAL AROUND AND BETWEEN STARS?

Why are the "clouds of dust and gas around and between the stars" so remarkably heterogeneous in this photo?

Analysis of the Allende meteorite in 1975 showed that heterogeneous material formed the solar system: All primordial helium in the Allende meteorite is accompanied by "strange" xenon in which Xe-124 and Xe-136 are enriched by a factor of ~2 from the p- and r-processes of nucleosynthesis reactions in a supernova. http://tinyurl.com/m54xz5

In 1995, the Galileo probe into Jupiter confirmed this link between primordial helium and "strange" xenon across astronomical distances. http://tinyurl.com/otnky3

In 2006, NASA even acknowledged that heterogeneous layers of a supernova are not mixed by a supernova explosion. http://tinyurl.com/3xoltt

Will Herschel photos now tell us that such heterogeneous material fills all of the space around and between the stars?

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
http://www.omatumr.com/

omatumr:

First of all, we must get past the irrational belief that all heavy elements are formed in stars, as there is no good, rational reason to believe this in the first place.

Regardless of what you believe about creation and the origins of the universe, there is absolutely no rational reason to think that the universe wasn't created with a large amount of heavy elements already in it.

When attempting to study the past, there is really no rational reason at all to say what "must be," particularly when we do not even understand the laws of physics themselves.

For example:
Scientists are still trying to determine just what in the world dark energy and dark matter actually are, and just what mathematical laws they obey (and I believe that if either of them exist they both must exist, and that moreover, there must be yet another such entity to explain anomalies that neither of those explains, but I digress,); Our science hasn't even described these entities yet, and still they try to tell us how old the universe is, or what the mass, age, and composition is of a star or galaxy allegedly 25 million light years distant.

How can we take seriously such measurements, when the FUNDAMENTAL LAWS which underlie and affect those measurements have not yet been accurately or adequately described?

How much "dark matter" is there?

Is Dark Energy a linear force? quadratic w/ respect to distance? cubic? Exponential?

Some problems with physics:

1) It literally is irrational to assume that the laws of physics are the same for all space and time. There is no justification whatsoever for this assumption, other than that it makes us feel good about ourselves, nor is there any evidence for it.

2) As previously stated, at least from a purely naturalistic perspective, it is irrational to assume much of anything about starting conditions when you don't know all the laws yet, and don't understand the ones you do know. It is certainly irrational to assume that the universe wasn't created with a relatively high content of heavy elements to begin with.

3) Regardless of 1 or 2 above, it is irrational to assume the universe, much less its creator, can be comprehended. It may simply be so complex and so complicated as to be beyond comprehension of mere mortal humans or perhaps even any imaginable artificial intelligence.

We can no more expect to accurately and precisely describe our universe than Mario can accurately and precisely describe the laws of his universe. All Mario could possibly "know" is that if he falls down a "bottomless" hole (which are everywhere,) or hits a koopa he's toast, and for "some reason" he can't run back to the left...none of this is rational, but it is all very much ordered...



The details of the "rules" and "formulas" in the background that make the "game universe" work are functionally irrelevant to both the player and the character, and only the creator needs be concerned with them. There may be more than one way for "mario" to explain his universe's laws, and yet it is possible that none of them are correct.

Occam's razor does not hold true at all, because it is possible that the "programmer" may have made the "program" more complicated than "necessary" in the "background" just to make people ask questions, or just because he felt like it, to amuse himself with a silly exercise, etc.


Trying to understand everything in the universe in every detail is a vain endeavor.

I do not know of anyone who knows anything accurate about the subject that believes that all heavy elements or all elements at all are formed in stars. However, the heavier elements were formed by supernova explosions.

It is thought that stars only fuse atomic nuclei up to Iron (Fe) or so with the rest as a result of radioactive processes involved in the death throes of stars as well as human activity for some of the heaviest which do not appear to occur in nature.