How Does It Contradict The Law Of Conservation Of Mass And The Law Of Conservation Of Science?

1178 Words5 Pages
“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” - Carl Sagan confidently announced on an episode of Cosmos in 1980. This theory that everything is made up of the ancient elements that were forged in the death of a star, is what scientists in the modern age base the entirety of their knowledge on. This theory also directly contradicts Julius Robert Mayers’ Law of Conservation of Energy and Antoine Lavoisier’s Law of Conservation of Mass. It provides a history to where the elements of our periodic table came from, and possibly a date to when the universe began. P1 - How does it contradict the Law of Conservation of Mass and the Law of Conservation of Energy? Carl Sagan quoted that “we are made of starstuff”, but what does this really mean? Sagan is talking about the effects of a supernova. A supernova is a transient astronomical event that occurs during the last stellar evolutionary stages of a massive star’s lifetime, whose catastrophic destruction is marked with a titanic explosion (May, 2017). This explosion is so enormous that the heat and energy emitted from the dying star forms heavy elements that are scattered into the universe, such as gold. These particles and elements fuse with other elements from other supernovas and begin to form planets and solar systems. Hence, when Sagan states “we are made of starstuff”, he is

More about How Does It Contradict The Law Of Conservation Of Mass And The Law Of Conservation Of Science?

Open Document